456 


;  ! 


HP 
1456 

.  K62 


Southern  Branch 
of  the 

University  of  California 

Los  Angeles 

Form  L-l 

Hf7 

(456 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamded  below 


JJJi  311925 

occ  2   im 

JAN  2 1  1927 

%*  «* 

***  Sl   IS 
5  1930 

28 

• 

S6  Vk 

>4mz*m 

. 

Form  L-9-5»n-7,'22 

-U/X&  Qjr^tJ '  jU^tAj£jtAJ^    iff 


1?ajlJUaa^ 


Equal  Opportunity 
For  All 

as  against 

Special  Benefits  to  a 
Privileged  Few 

47983 

Bp  FREDERIC  E.  KIP, 

"Kypsburg,"  Montclair, 
New  Jersey. 

i 

- 
Equal  Opportunity  for  All 

as  against 

Special  Benefits  to  a 
Privileged  Few 


•5 

in 


4 


EQUAL  Opportunity  for  All  in  the  United  States  is 
most  difficult  if  not  impossible  of  attainment 
under  our  present  system  of  multiplied  state  laws, 
many  of  said  laws  being  contradictory,  and  the  attempt 
to  have  them  operate  in  states  other  than  where  they  were 
passed  has  resulted  in  our  present  confused  condition. 
We  shall  never  have  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  in  the 
United  States  until  we  have  one  set  of  laws  for  the  same 
thing  operating  to  the  same  effect  all  over  the  country. 

Much  effort  has  been  expended  to  find  the  germ  that 
afflicts  our  body  politic,  and  to-day  the  American  people 
are  ready  to  deal  radically  in  order  to  cut  out  the 
canker  of  special  privilege  for  the  few,  and  to  create  in 
its  place  conditions  which  will  bring  equity  in  law  and 
"Equal  Opportunity  to  All"  in  fact. 

The  germ  of  our  disease  is  the  existence  in  our  country, 
for  identically  the  same  purpose,  of  forty-nine  different 
systems  of  law  with  hundreds  and  hundreds  of  state  laws, 
all  different  and  some  contradictory,  and  our  allowing 
these  wholly  different  and  contradictory  state  laws  to 
attempt  to  operate  over  other  states  than  those  in  which 
they  are  actually  passed  and  to  which  they  properly  be- 
long. What  is  the  result?  The  present  great  confusion 
and  chaos.  It  seems  so  foolish  that  we  should  allow  these 
absurdities,  causing  such  chaotic  conditions  to  exist  in 
our  midst,  and  working  against  "Equal  Opportunity  for 
All,"  that  we  must  first  explain  why  it  is  that  the  different 
state  laws  became  the  law  in  fact  of  the  entire  land. 

[3] 


Hundreds  of 
Laws  for  the 
Same   Thing, 
Many  of 
Same  Con- 
tradictory 
and   Impos- 
sible of 
Execution. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       F   O   K       ALL 


Confusion  of 

Original 

Colonies — 

Afterwards 

Thirteen 

Original 

States — was 

Practically 

the  Same  as 

Confusion 

Existing 

with  us 

To-day. 


The  beginning  of  our  Nation  was  the  coming  together 
into  a  Federation  in  1787  of  the  thirteen  original  States. 
Each  colony  previous  to  that  had  had  full  control  of 
ever3'thing  within  its  borders  as  an  individual  sovereignty. 
The  thirteen  original  States  were  called  together  by  Wash- 
ington, and  the  proposition  presented  was  a  commercial 
and  not  a  political  one.  From  this  call  of  Washington 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  was  in  1787  the 
outcome. 

There  was  at  that  time  a  condition  of  confusion  in 
these  thirteen  original  States,  there  being  things  that 
none  of  them  could  individually  properly  control,  and 
they  were  therefore  compelled  to  give  unto  the  Collective 
States — the  Federal  Government — certain  of  those  things 
which  made  confusion  and  chaos  by  attempt  of  individual 
state  control.  How  did  they  arrive  at  a  conclusion  rela- 
tive thereto? 

They  used  as  a  basis  to  determine  that  which 
should  come  under  Federal  control  and  law,  the 
test  as  to  whether  the  matter  was  of  general  or 
universal  interest  as  opposed  to  local  or  in- 
dividual state  interest.  Interstate  commerce 
consisted  of  business  activities  extending  beyond 
the  borders  of  any  one  state;  therefore,  no  one 
individual  state  could  properly  control  same ; 
hence,  in  1787  the  Constitution  gave  the  Federal 
Government    control    over    all    interstate    com- 


Federal 

Law  and 

Control 

Over  all 

Interstate 

Commerce 

and 

Navigable 

Waterways. 


Later  the  Federal  Government,  as  an  implied 
result  of  the  grant  of  control  over  interstate 
commerce,  took  complete  control  over  all  navi- 
gable waterways  of  the  country  because  they 
were  then  the  only  existing  arteries  of  transpor- 
tation for  interstate  commerce  articles ;  and, 
mark  you,  the  Federal  Government  since  then 
has  controlled  and  to-day  does  control  all  navi- 
gable   waterwavs    bv    Federal    law,    said    law 


4] 


E  Q  l7   A   L       O   V   I*  O  R  T   IT   N    I  T  Y       FOR       ALL 


operating  both  within  the  individual  state  and 
without  the  individual  state. 

For  exactly  the  same  reason,  namely,  matters  of  gen- 
eral or  universal  interest,  as  opposed  to  local  or  individual 
state  interest,  the  thirteen  original  States  placed  under 
Federal  law  and  control : 

The  Customs  Duties. 
The  United  States  Mail. 

And  the  Federal  Government's  control  relative  thereto 
is  supreme  both  within  the  individual  state  and  without 
the  individual  state. 

All  vessels  under  the  grant  of  Admiralty 
jurisdiction  were  also  placed  under  Federal  con- 
trol and  law ;  and,  mark  you  again,  this  Ad- 
miralty control  operated,  and  to-day  continues 
to  operate,  over  all  vessels  whether  they  sail 
exclusively  within  the  borders  of  one  state  or 
not ;  so  again  we  have  our  Federal  law  operating 
both  within  the  individual  state  and  without 
same. 

After  making  over  these  certain  rights  to  the  Federal 
Government,  other  rights  were  immediately  added.  As 
soon  as  the  Government  was  organized  in  1789,  ten 
amendments  were  made  of  which  the  Ninth  and  Tenth 
are  as  follows: 

IX. 

"The  enumeration  in  the  Constitution,  of  cer- 
tain rights,  shall  not  be  construed  to  deny  or 
disparage  others  retained  by  the  people." 

X. 

"The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United 
States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it 
to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respec- 
tively, or  to  the  people." 

[5] 


Federal 
Control 
and  Law 
Over 
Customs 
Duties,  U.  8. 
Mail,  and 
A  dmiralty 
Jurisdiction. 


Rights 
Reserved  tv 
the  People. 


Powers 
Reserved 
to  the  States 
or  to  the 
People. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

Mark  you  the  language:  "or  to  the  people."  In  other 
words,  the  Framers  of  the  Constitution  say  they  were  then 
(1787  and  1789)  giving  over  to  the  United  States  (Fed- 
eral Government)  such  powers  as  will  allow  the  Federal 
laws  to  operate  relative  to  things  that  have  become  of 
more  general  interest  than  of  individual  state  interest, 
(and  which  had  produced  confused  conditions  by  attempt 
of  individual  state  control),  and  all  things  not  specifically 
given  over  to  the  Federal  Government  "are  reserved  to  the 
states  respectively,  or  to  the  people." 

The  very  language  that  all  rights,  other  than  those 
given  to  the  United  States,  are  reserved  to  the  people 
shows  the  minds  of  the  early  framers  of  the  Constitution, 
viz: — that  they  had  then  placed  under  Federal  law  and 
control  those  things  which  had  then  become  of  such  gen- 
eral interest  as  opposed  to  individual  state  interest,  as  to 
make  such  change  necessary,  and  that  in  the  future  the 
people,  with  change  of  conditions,  could  place  such  other 
things  in  the  hands  of  the  Federal  Government  as  would 
then  also  have  become  of  more  general  interest  than  of 
individual  state  interest. 

If,  in  1787,  the  individual  states  could  each  have 
properly  controlled  interstate  commerce,  customs  duties, 
mails,  admiralty  jurisdiction,  etc.,  do  you  suppose,  for 
one  minute,  these  states  would  have  parted  with  any  of 
such  rights  ?  No,  indeed,  they  would  not :  it  was  only 
because  at  that  time  (1787)  those  particular  things 
created  so  much  confusion  and  chaos  by  the  unsuccessful 
attempt  of  individual  state  control  (for  the  reason  that 
the  said  things  had  then  become  of  so  much  more  general 
than  of  local  state  interest)  that  our  forefathers  were 
compelled  to  place  same  under  Federal  law,  to  avoid  the 
confused  conditions  of  the  then  attempted  but  ineffectual 
state  law  and  control. 

So  are  we  to-day  confronted  with  identically  the  same 
problems  as  were  our  forefathers  in  1787,  viz: — invention 
(almost  annihilating  time  and  space),  transportation,  in- 

[61 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


dustry,  and  business  have  so  changed  since  1787,  and  they 
in  turn  have  so  altered  conditions  that  many  of  the  things 
that  were  formerly  of  local  have  now  become  of  general 
interest,  and  the  attempt  of  state  control  now  results  in 
confusion,  just  the  same  as  the  local  control  of  those  other 
things  resulted  in  confusion  in  1787.  There  is  no  more 
reason  why  the  people  of  to-day  should  not  give  over  to 
Federal  law  and  control  certain  present  things  which  were 
formerly  local,  but  which  have  now  become,  by  our  changed 
conditions,  of  more  general  interest,  than  there  was  for 
our  forefathers — the  early  framers  of  the  Constitution — 
not  to  have  then  given  over  to  Federal  law  those  fewer 
things  that  in  1787  had  already  become  of  more  general 
than  local  interest,  and  that  then  required  to  be  put 
under  Federal  law  to  obviate  the  confusion  of  that  day 
which  resulted  from  attempted  but  ineffectual  individual 
state  control. 

After  declaring  our  independence  in  1776 
and  winning  it  in  1783,  we  still  existed  until  1789 
as  thirteen  separate  states  united  only  by  the 
agreement  known  as  the  Articles  of  Confedera- 
tion, by  which  the  separate  states  granted  to 
Congress  only  a  few  very  limited  powers. 

George  Washington,  Alexander  Hamilton 
and  other  thinkers  and  doers  of  those  early  days 
strenuously  maintained  that  the  chaos,  confusion 
and  inequalities  caused  by  certain  things  that 
could  not  be  properly  controlled  by  individual 
States,  could  only  be  cured  by  granting  extended 
powers  over  such  things  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. 

George  Washington  argued  most  strenuous- 
ly for  such  increased  powers  for  the  Federal 
Government.  His  exact  words  in  1786  are  very 
illumining  and  were  most  prophetic : 

"It  is  clear  to  me  as  'A.  B.  C  that  an  ex- 
tension of  Federal  powers  would  make  us  one 
of   the   most   happy,   wealthy,   respectable   and 

m 


George 
Washing- 
ton's  Pre- 
diction of 
Benefit  front 
Extended 
Federal 
Powers. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

powerful  nations  that  ever  inhabited  the  terres- 
trial globe.  Without  them  we  shall  soon  be 
everything  which  is  the  direct  reverse.  I  predict 
the  worst  consequences  from  a  half-starved, 
limping  government,  always  moving  on  crutches 
and  tottering  at  every  step." 

The  extension  of  Federal  powers  in  1787  and  1789 
resulted,  just  as  the  immortal  Washington  in  1786  pre- 
dicted that  it  would  do,  and  history  now  records  that  it 
has  done,  viz,  produced: 

"One  of  the  most  happy,  wealthy,  respectable 
and  powerful  nations  that  ever  inhabited  the 
terrestrial  globe." 

Our  great  inventions  since  1789  of  steam,  electricity, 
telegraph}^,  telephone,  interstate  business  activities,  trans- 
portation means,  etc.,  etc.,  have  made  with  us  now  new 
conditions.  These  new  conditions  are  now  producing  con- 
fusion, chaos  and  unequal  opportunities,  just  the  same 
as  those  fewer  other  things  in  1783  and  1789  produced 
then  confusion,  chaos  and  unequal  opportunities.  The 
cure  now  for  the  present  state  of  affairs  is  just  the  same 
as  the  cure  was  then,  and  the  immortal  Washington's 
prophetic  words  of  1786  are  just  as  applicable  now  as 
then : 

"/  predict  the  worst  consequences  from  a 
half-starved,  limping  government,  always  mov- 
ing on  crutches  and  tottering  at  every  step" 

Although  we  may  be  wealthy,  indeed  very  wealthy, 
we,  as  a  nation,  cannot  be  truly  happy  nor  truly  great 
unless  we  vouchsafe  to  every  man, 

"EQUALITY  OF  OPPORTUNITY" 

Without  this  we  must  remain  a 

"limping  government,  always  moving  on  crutches 
and  tottering  at  every  step." 

But  some  will  raise  the  objection  that  if  the  changes 
proposed  are  made,  we  shall  have  too  centralized  a  gov- 

[  8  1 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       A   T,   L 


ernment.  The  answer  is — Equal  Opportunity  for  each 
individual  is  the  most  important  thing  in  the  world ;  and 
if  it  is  obtainable  only  by  having  a  more  centralized 
government,  then  by  all  means  let  us  have  a  more  cen- 
tralized government,  because  the  only  true  and  abiding 
for  all  time  foundation  for  any  government  is  "Equal  Op- 
portunity for  All"  with  special  privilege  to  none. 

To-day,  as  we  have  just  stated,  we  are  in  practically 
the  same  condition  of  confusion  as  were  our  thirteen  origi- 
nal States  in  1787,  and  for  our  solution  we  too  must  also 
use  the  same  basis  as  did  the  thirteen  original  States  in 
1787  to  determine  that  which  should  be  placed  under 
Federal  control  and  law,  viz  : 

The  test  as  to  whether  the  matter  is  of  more 
general  (or  interstate)  interest  than  local  or  in- 
dividual state  interest. 

Therefore,  the  propositions  herein  presented  for  the 
betterment  of  our  people,  and  the  substitution  of  order, 
equity,  and  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All,"  for  the  present 
confusion,  instead  of  being — as  may  have  seemed  at  first — 
revolutionar}r  and  contrar}'  to  the  existing  order  of  things, 
are  in  reality  nothing  more  or  less  than  the  application  of 
exactly  the  same  tests  and  standards  that  the  thirteen 
original  States  applied  in  1787.  In  other  words,  by  the 
changed  conditions  of  life,  industries,  commerce,  transpor- 
tation, communication,  etc.,  all  our  present  large  inter- 
state business  activities  have  become  more  and  more  of 
general  interest,  and  less  and  less  of  local  or  individual 
state  interest,  and  as  such  should  be  also  under  Federal 
law,  said  law  operating  both  within  and  without  the  state 
where  domiciled. 

Therefore,  by  applying  the  same  test  as  the  thirteen 
original  States  applied  in  1787  and  making  our  laws  ac- 
cordingly you  do  away  with  practically  all  of  the  present 
confusion  and  chaos,  you  prevent  trust  domination  to  the 
detriment  of  the  people  by  curing  many  of  the  present 
trust  evils  and  especially  the  discrimination  of  transporta- 

[91 


Our  Equal 
Opportunity 
Proposals 
Not  Revolu- 
tionary   But 
Natural. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Domicile 

the   Factor 

with   the 

Individual 

States. 


Example 

of  our 

Erroneous 

System 

and  Law. 


tion  advantages  to  a  privileged  few,  you  make  equal 
opportunities  for  all,  and  you  operate  all  over  the  United 
States  by  fundamentally  correct  principles  and  funda- 
mentally sound  law,  just  the  same  as  do  all  other  civilized 
nations,  including  England,  Germany  and  France,  as  will 
be  later  herein  set  forth  and  proven. 

Notwithstanding  that  the  states  collectively  placed 
under  Federal  control  and  law  such  matters  as  were  in 
1787  of  more  general  interest,  as  stated  above,  even  then 
and  thereafter  when  they  acted  in  their  individual  state 
capacity  they  used  domicile  as  a  basis  to  determine  that 
which  should  remain  under  state  control.  In  time  this 
living  or  domicile  came  to  be  extended  to  cover  either 
actual  domicile  or  legal  domicile. 

By  way  of  illustration,  which  proves  how  incorrect 
our  present  system  really  is,  take  the  case  of  a  New  York 
firm  which  desires  to  incorporate  its  business.  It  asks 
itself  the  question:  Which  state  affords  the  best  induce- 
ments for  incorporation?  Perhaps  the  answer  will  be 
Delaware;  therefore  the  firm  incorporates  in  Delaware, 
although  it  does  not  own  one  dollar  in  that  state.  Once 
a  year  the  parties  interested  have  an  annual  meeting  in  a 
lawyer's  office,  and  this  is  all  that  need  be  done  within  the 
State  of  Delaware.  Indeed,  the  slight  formality  of  having 
annually  one  meeting  within  the  state  is  not  even  required 
by  the  State  of  Delaware.  Notwithstanding  this,  Dela- 
ware tries  to  throw  its  mantle  over  the  acts  of  that  cor- 
poration, not  only  in  the  State  of  New  York,  but  in  each 
and  every  other  state  in  the  Union.  A  Delaware  sheriff 
could  not  arrest  a  horse  thief  across  the  border-line  of  the 
state,  yet  here  is  Delaware  endeavoring  to  extend  its 
mantle  over  this  realty  New  York  State  corporation  not 
only  in  its  home  state  but  over  its  activities  in  every  state 
of  the  Union,  with  the  natural  and  inevitable  result  of  the 
present  confusion  and  chaos,  because  Delaware  is  attempt- 
ing to  do  something  which  it  cannot  do.  Its  jurisdiction 
is  exclusively  within  the  border-lines  of  the  State  of  Dela- 
ware, yet  it  is  trying  legally  to  throw  its  jurisdiction  over 

[10] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       A   L  L 


all  the  other  states  of  the  Union.  This  might  be  borne  if 
Delaware  were  really  able  to  govern  the  corporation  and 
to  protect  the  interests  of  its  stockholders,  creditors,  cus- 
tomers, and  employees  all  over  the  country,  but  the  real 
facts  are  that  Delaware  can  do  little  outside  of  its  own 
borders  beyond  producing  conflict  with  local  regulations 
of  other  states,  and  confusion  where  everyone  desires 
order. 

In  order  to  understand  why  the  individual  states  use 
"domicile"  as  their  basis  to  determine  that  which  should 
remain  under  state  law,  we  must  go  back  of  the  formation 
of  the  Federal  Government  in  1787.  As  has  been  stated, 
each  colony — and  its  successor,  the  state — previous  to 
that  time  had  full  control  over  everything  within  its 
borders  as  an  individual  sovereignty ;  consequently  when 
a  man  lived  or  domiciled  within  the  borders  of  any  par- 
ticular colony  or  state,  all  law  relative  to  this  man,  his 
family,  his  house,  and  all  within  his  house,  his  goods,  etc., 
were  considered  as  coming  under  the  jurisdiction  of  that 
particular  colony,  or  later,  that  particular  state;  and 
naturally,  later  when  factories — larger  houses,  so  to  speak 
— were  built,  all  law  relative  to  the  articles  produced  in 
said  factories,  and  the  operatives  within  the  factories, 
were  also  under  that  particular  state  law. 

The  situation  at  that  time  (1787),  however,  was  prac- 
tically harmless,  for  such  things  as  nation-wide  industries 
were  then  unknown.  There  were  few  factories,  and  what 
there  were  supplied  chiefly  a  local  demand,  or  when  their 
goods  did  go  into  other  states  it  was  by  specific  consign- 
ment and  without  much  direct  relation  between  the  manu- 
facturer and  the  consumer.  Competition  between  fac- 
tories in  the  different  states  was  comparatively  unim- 
portant. To  ship  goods  from  Boston  to  Philadelphia  was 
more  like  foreign  commerce  than  the  domestic  commerce 
of  to-day.  It  took  as  long  then  to  ship  from  Boston  to 
Philadelphia  as  it  does  to-day  to  ship  from  Boston  to 
London,  and  it  was  practically  the  same  sort  of  a  transac- 
tion, even  to  the  fact  that  the  shipments  in  quantity  were 

[HI 


Conditions 
at  and 

Previous 
to  1787. 


Changed 
Condition* 
of  To-day. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


necessarily  by  sea.  Communication  was  also  necessarily 
slow,  and  the  control  of  every-day  transactions  had  to 
be  local  in  order  to  be  effective.  To-day  through  the 
wonderfully  changed  conditions  in  transportation,  in  the 
development  of  inventions,  almost  annihilating  time  and 
space,  the  tremendous  enlargement  of  our  industries  and 
their  change  to  more  and  more  of  interstate  and  general 
interest  and  less  and  less  of  individual  state  interest,  the 
country  at  large  is  facing  the  same  proposition  as  the  col- 
lective States  had  to  face  in  1787  when  they  had  to  deter- 
mine that  which  should  be  given  over  to  Federal  control 
and  law.  For  the  good  of  the  American  toiling  masses 
and  to  make  toward  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All,"  we 
to-day  must  follow  the  example  of  the  collective  States  in 
1787,  and  make  any  article  that  has  been  predetermined  to 
How  in  interstate  commerce — and  which  therefore  is  of 
more  general  interest  than  of  individual  state  interest — 
subject  to  Federal  law.  There  is  no  other  way  that  we 
can  obtain  "Equity  and  Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  than 
to  have  one  set  of  Federal  laws  applying  to  the  many 
phases  of  our  social  and  economic  life,  to  which,  in  the 
early  days  of  our  nation,  the  application  of  numerous 
state  laws  was  not  the  evil  which  it  is  to-day. 


Cause 

of  our 

Present 

Inequality. 

Confusion, 

and   Chaos. 


Cure  for 

Present 

Inequality 

and 

Confusion. 


The  fact  that  the  individual  states  took  domicile  as  a 
basis  to  determine  that  which  would  remain  under  state 
law  instead  of  dealing  with  the  article  produced,  which  is 
the  crucial  and  important  thing,  has  caused  the  present 
tremendous  confusion,  inequality,  and  unequal  oppor- 
tunity, and  it  is  now  possible  only  to  obtain  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All"  by  seeing  that  both  the  individual 
states  and  the  states  collectively  shall  use  the  same  basis 
in  both  cases  for  determination:  that  is,  whether  the  ar- 
ticle is  of  more  general  interest  and  is  or  is  not  intended 
to  flow  into  interstate  commerce,  namely: 

All  "articles"  predetermined  to  remain  within  the 
border-lines  of  a  particular  state  shall  be  exclusively  under 
state  law  and  control. 


L2 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALU 


All  "articles"'  predetermined  and  predeclared  to  go 
into  interstate  commerce  shall  be,  together  with  the  busi- 
ness activities  connected  therewith,  exclusively  under  Fed- 
eral law,  both  within  and  without  the  individual  state. 

All  labor  connected  with  such  "articles"  predetermined 
and  predeclared  to  go  into  interstate  commerce  shall  also 
be  under  Federal  law. 

This  would  resolve  itself  into  the  following  proposi- 
tions : 

Proposition  1.  Every  individual,  firm,  and 
corporation  should,  as  to  their  business  activi- 
ties, be  under  "State  law,"  if,  and  only  if,  they 
confine  their  business  activity  within  the  borders 
of  the  state  in  question. 

Proposition  2.  The  moment  any  individual, 
firm,  or  corporation  predetermines  and  declares 
intention  to  engage  in  interstate  commerce,  he, 
they,  or  it  shall  at  once  become  subject  exclu- 
sively to  "Federal  law,"  and  all  labor  connected 
with  their  business  activities  shall  also  become 
subject  exclusively  to  "Federal  law,"  said  Fed- 
eral laws  operating  both  within  the  state  where 
the  business  is  domiciled  and  without  the  state. 

In  1T87  the  Federal  Government  was  given  control 
over  interstate  commerce ;  and  as  the  navigable  waterways 
of  the  country  were  then  the  only  important  arteries 
carrying  articles  in  interstate  commerce,  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, as  an  implied  result  of  the  grant  of  control  over 
interstate  commerce,  soon  assumed  complete  control  over 
all  navigable  streams,  rivers,  and  harbors,  and  Congress 
was  expressly  given  control  over  all  vessels  under  the  grant 
of  Admiralty  jurisdiction.  Thus  the  Federal  Constitution 
did  give  to  Congress  the  control  of  the  then  existing  in- 
struments of  commerce,  whether  actually  engaged  at  the 
moment  in  interstate  commerce  or  not.  Therefore  to-dav 
the   Federal   Government   takes   charge   of  all   navigable 

[131 


Importance 
of  Federal 
Control  of 
Navigable 
Rivers,  V.  S. 
Custom 
House  and 
V.  8.  Mails. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Importance 

of  Federal 

Control  and 

Law  for 

Our  Great 

Interstate 

Commerce 

Articles, 

Coal,  Oil, 

Etc. 


waterways  in  each  of  the  separate  states,  and  bulk-heads 
or  obstructions  of  any  kind  cannot  be  built  upon  same  in 
any  individual  state  without  the  authority  and  sanction  of 
the  Federal  Government. 

To-day  many  of  the  articles  of  our  greatest  industries, 
namely,  oil,  coal,  iron,  automobiles,  cold  storage  ware- 
house companies,  etc.,  stand  just  where  the  vessels  and 
the  waters  of  the  navigable  rivers  of  the  individual  states 
stood  in  1787,  as  to-day,  coal,  oil,  iron,  cold  storage  food- 
stuffs, etc.,  are  just  as,  and  even  more,  important  elements 
of  general  interest  and  of  interstate  commerce  than  the 
admiralty  vessels,  navigable  waterways,  the  custom  duties, 
or  the  mail  of  any  individual  state;  yet,  because  the  coal 
of  Pennsylvania  and  West  Virginia,  the  oils  of  Pennsyl- 
vania and  Ohio,  the  water  powers  of  Niagara,  Maine, 
North  Carolina,  Georgia,  etc.,  cold  storage  warehouses 
and  the  large  interstate  industries  were  all  domiciled  within 
the  border-lines  of  particular  states,  they  have  erroneously 
been  suffered  to  remain  under  state  control  and  law.  A 
few  minutes'  investigation  along  the  line  of  our  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All"  plan  will  show  how  incorrect  this 
really  is.  As  mentioned  before,  the  states  placed  under 
Federal  control  and  law  the  navigable  waterways  because 
these  waterways  were  bound  to  flow  between  states  and  to 
be  used  in  interstate  commerce  for  transportation  of  inter- 
state articles. 

Now,  for  argument's  sake,  to  prove  our  point,  suppose 
we  dry  up  or  prohibit  in  some  way  before  they  leave  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania  the  state  waters  of  the  Sus- 
quehanna River.  A  considerable  amount  of  hardship  will 
be  inflicted  upon  certain  river-shipping  interests,  but  still 
the  freight  can  be  handled  by  other  means  of  transporta- 
tion. But  now  suppose  we  prohibit  all  coal  from  leaving 
Pennsylvania  and  other  states  where  coal  exists,  so  that 
there  will  be  no  coal  in  any  but  a  few  states.  Nearly  all 
industries  in  the  entire  United  States  must  in  a  compara- 
tively short  time  shut  down.  No  light,  no  trolleys,  no  rail- 
roads running — either  electrical  or  steam — no  heat,  no 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


work  for  operatives  formerly  employed  in  all  industries, 
and,  constituted  as  things  are  to-day,  millions  in  the 
United  States  would  freeze  to  death,  and  the  agony  of 
millions  of  people  and  the  calamity  to  thousands  of  indus- 
tries would  simply  be  unthinkable. 

Which,  therefore,  is  the  more  important  for  Federal 
control,  coal  or  the  navigable  waterways?  Or,  weighed  up 
as  things  were  in  1787,  which  is  more  bound  to  flow  or 
travel  in  interstate  commerce,  and  which  is  of  more  general 
as  opposed  to  individual  state  interest,  or  which  does  the 
welfare  of  the  people  require  to  move  more  unimpededly, 
coal  or  the  navigable  waters  of  the  state? 

Why  do  we  tolerate  longer  a  system  of  laws  which 
brings  under  Federal  law  and  control  within  and  without 
the  individual  states  vessels  and  all  navigable  waterways, 
and  denies  such  similar  Federal  law  and  control  both 
within  and  without  the  states  to  articles  such  as  coal,  oil, 
iron,  etc.,  when  some  of  these  articles,  in  both  general  in- 
terest and  in  an  interstate  commerce  sense,  are  thousands 
of  times  more  important  both  to  the  welfare  and  to  the 
very  lives  of  the  people  of  all  the  states  of  the  Union? 

Do  we  not  know  that  the  coal  from  the  mines  of  Penn- 
sylvania is  just  as  sure  to  flow  in  interstate  commerce  as 
are  admiralty  vessels  or  the  waters  of  Pennsylvania's  navi- 
gable rivers,  and  that  coal  is  of  far  more  general  interest 
than  of  local  or  of  any  individual  state  interest?  If  the 
government  takes  control  of  the  vessels  and  navigable 
rivers  within  the  individual  states,  why  should  not  one  set 
of  Federal  laws  also  have  control  within  the  individual 
state  of  that  particular  article  predetermined  and  pre- 
declared  to  travel  in  interstate  commerce? 

All  of  the  larger  interstate  business  of  the  country 
stands  in  just  the  same  relation  as  does  this  coal  of  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania.  For  instance,  take  the  example 
of  the  Willys  Automobile  Works  in  Toledo,  Ohio,  or  the 
Ford  Automobile  Works  in  Detroit,  Michigan.  The  out- 
lay in  these  plants,  as  is  well-known,  merely  for  buildings 

[15] 


Many  of  Our 
Commercial 
'Articles" 
Are  More 
Bound  to 
Flow  in 
Interstate 
Commerce 
Than   the 
Navigable 
Rivers. 


Example — 
Willy  8  or 
"Ford" 
Automobiles. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

and  machinery  has  been  many  millions  of  dollars — one 
automatic  machine  alone  costing  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  dollars.  Of  course,  it  is  utterly  impossible  that  the 
residents  of  the  single  states  wherein  these  immense  plants 
are  located  could  buy  all  of  the  automobiles  produced  in 
said  works.  Hence,  we  know  absolute^  that  the  Willys 
automobiles  produced  in  this  Ohio  factory  and  the  Ford 
automobiles  produced  in  this  Michigan  factory  will  be 
sold  and  delivered  all  over  the  country,  (in  fact  all  over 
the  world),  and  will  so  flow  in  interstate  commerce,  and 
are  far  more  of  general  interest  than  of  any  one  state  in- 
terest. Therefore,  the  Willys  Automobile  Works,  instead 
of  being  under  the  control  of  the  State  of  Ohio,  and  the 
Ford  Automobile  Works  under  the  control  of  the  State 
of  Michigan,  both  should  be  regulated  within  and  without 
these  states  entirely  and  exclusively  by  Federal  laws. 
Under  the  present  system  the  shipments  of  these  com- 
panies within  their  respective  States  are  under  State  law, 
the  shipments  beyond  the  states  are  under  Federal  law, 
but  the  factories  and  all  the  material  therein,  and  the 
operatives  connected  therewith,  and  all  that  concerns  their 
business  activities  are  under  the  State  law. 

The  Willys  and  Ford  Automobile  Works  are  really 
national  institutions  and  they  should  not  be  any  more 
under  the  control  of  the  States  of  Ohio  or  Michigan, 
merely  because  they  are  physically  located  there,  than 
should  the  vessels  or  the  navigable  waters  located  in  these 
States  be  under  State  control. 

The  business  activities  of  these  automobile  works 
should  be  under  the  law  and  domination  of  the  States  of 
Ohio  and  Michigan,  provided  they  predetermine  that 
their  business  activities  shall  be  confined  to  the  limits  of 
the  respective  States,  wherein  the  state  jurisdiction  and 
law  are  supreme,  but  if  the  Willys  and  Ford  Automobile 
Works  predetermine  and  predeclare  their  intention  of 
doing  an  interstate  business,  the  entire  business  should  be 
under  one  set  of  Federal  laws,  as  provided  for  in  our  Pro- 
position No.  2.     For  the  crucial  thing  is  the  article  pro- 

f  16  1 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

duced.  If  this  article  is  actually  confined  to  the  border- 
line of  the  state,  all  law  relative  thereto  and  all  labor 
connected  therewith  should  properly  belong  exclusively 
to  the  individual  state.  If,  however,  the  article  cannot 
be  confined  within  the  limits  of  the  border-line  of  the 
state,  and  is  predetermined  to  flow  and  travel  in  interstate 
commerce,  then  the  article  and  the  business  activities 
connected  therewith  have  the  same  application  as  the 
navigable  waters  of  any  individual  state  or  vessels  under 
admiralty  jurisdiction  and  should  be  controlled  both 
within  the  state  itself,  and  without  the  state,  by  one  set  of 
Federal  laws.  Then,  and  then  only,  can  we  have  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All." 


To  continue  our  present  contradictor}7  State  laws,  at- 
tempting to  operate  in  interstate  relations,  and  producing 
the  present  confusion  and  chaos,  is  absurdity  in  the  ex- 
treme. Let  the  individual  states  be  supreme  within  their 
own  borders,  but  do  not  permit  them  to  have  a  pretended 
control  over  other  states,  when,  in  fact,  it  is  utterly  im- 
possible for  them  to  exercise  such  control  on  any  equitable 
and  efficient  basis.  The  attempt  results  not  only  in  the 
present  confusion  but  also  in  a  system  which  makes  for 
the  special  privileges  and  advantages  of  a  few  as  against 
"Equal  Opportunity  for  All." 

Notwithstanding  that  for  all  these  years  we  have  lived 
under  the  erroneous  pretense  that  one  state  can  and  does 
extend  its  authority  over  business  activities  and  means  of 
transportation  in  another  state,  the  real  fact  is  that  this 
is  not  so,  as  it  is  impossible  under  our  Constitution  ac- 
tually so  to  do,  because  when  any  business  activity  extends 
beyond  the  border-lines  of  any  one  particular  state,  viz — 
to  two  or  more  states — it  is  nothing  more  or  less  than 
interstate  commerce,  and  there  is  no  other  known  au- 
thority that  can  act  relative  thereto  but  the  Federal 
Government,  as  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  ex- 
pressly provides  that  all  interstate  commerce  shall  be 
under  Federal  law  and  control. 


Pretended 
Control  of 
Individual 
States  Over 
Other  States. 


Impossible 
Under  Our 
Constitution 
for 

Individual 
State 

Control  to 
be  Interstate 
in  Its 
Function. 


[17 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Interstate 

Articles  and 

Business 

Activities 

Require 

Interstate 

(Federal) 

Law. 


The  navigable  rivers  of  the  country  were  early  placed 
under  Federal  law  and  control  as  an  implied  grant  of 
power  over  interstate  commerce.  To-day  all  business  ac- 
tivities (viz,  the  direct  sale,  shipment,  or  purchase  of 
articles  from  another  state)  stand  just  in  the  same  relation 
as  the  navigable  waterways,  or  admiralty  vessels,  as  they 
represent  articles  flowing  or  traveling  between  states  or 
in  interstate  commerce. 

It  is  exactly  the  same  also  with  the  means  of  transpor- 
tation of  the  country.  They  are  charging  a  toll  for 
transporting  articles  and  persons  between  states  or  in 
interstate  commerce. 

It  is  exactly  the  same  also  with  the  telephone  and  tele- 
graph companies.  They  are  charging  a  toll  for  trans- 
porting intelligence  over  wire;  in  the  one  case,  the  tele- 
phone, intelligence  by  aid  of  interstate  transportation  of 
the  human  voice,  and,  in  the  other  case,  interstate  trans- 
portation of  intelligence  by  aid  of  the  telegraphic  code. 
Everyone  of  them,  however,  involves  flowing  or  traveling 
between  states,  and  therefore  in  interstate  commerce,  just 
exactly  as  flow  or  travel  the  navigable  waterways  of  the 
country ;  and  the}'  all  should  operate,  and  operate  only, 
under  Federal  laws,  exactly  as  the  vessels  and  the  navi- 
gable waterways  of  the  country  are  to-day  and  long  have 
been  under  Federal  law. 

If  it  is  right  and  proper  to  have  the  navigable  water- 
ways and  vessels  under  admiralty  jurisdiction,  according 
to  the  Constitution,  under  Federal  law,  said  law  operating 
both  within  and  without  the  state  where  domiciled,  then 
it  is  also  just  as  right  and  just  as  proper  to  have  all  means 
of  transportation,  including  telephone  and  telegraph  com- 
panies, cold  storage  warehouse  companies  and  all  busi- 
ness activities  extending  over  two  or  more  states,  also  un- 
der Federal  law,  said  law  to  operate  also  both  within  and 
without  the  state  where  domiciled. 

Then,  and  then  only,  zvill  we  get  rid  of  our  present  con- 
fusion, chaos,  and  great  inequalities,  and  replace  the  same 

[18] 


E  Q   U   A    L       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


with  order,  justice,  efficiency,  and  "Equal  Opportunity 
for  AIL" 

On  the  other  hand,  of  course,  individual  firms  or  cor- 
porate enterprises  which  confine  their  business  wholly 
within  the  limits  of  a  state  should  be  subject,  and  subject 
only,  to  the  laws  of  that  state.  Such,  for  example,  would 
be  the  case  of  most  gas,  trolley,  electric  or  other  public 
service  companies  which  operate  entirely  within  one  state ; 
so  also  amusement  companies  and  retail  shops.  The  only 
point  to  be  noticed  with  respect  to  such  concerns  is  that 
if  they  incorporate  such  incorporation  must  be  made  in 
the  state  in  which  they  transact  their  business.  The 
anomaly  should  not  be  tolerated  of  an  enterprise  operat- 
ing in  one  state  being  incorporated  and  subject  to  the 
law  of  another  state  possibly  thousands  of  miles  away. 

Under  our  plan  the  amounts  to  be  derived  from  taxes 
by  the  individual  states  will  not  be  perceptibly  less  than 
at  the  present  time,  but  the  individual  state's  expenses  will 
be  very  materiallv  less,  as  fully  set  forth  on  pages  48,  49, 
and  50. 

Now  let  us  follow  up  our  discovery  of  the  cause  of 
our  present-da}7  disease,  put  our  remedy  to  the  test  and 
see  whether  or  not  it  will  dissipate  the  present  chaotic 
conditions  and  make  for  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All." 
A  few  examples  will  suffice  to  show  the  need,  efficiency,  and 
benefit  of  our  proposals. 

Example  No.  J.  In  one  state  the  age  limit 
for  the  employment  of  a  child  is  fourteen  years. 
In  some  other  states  there  is  no  age  limit  at  all. 
Therefore,  in  such  state  a  child  could  be  put  to 
work  when  six,  eight,  or  ten  years  of  age — yet 
the  child  is  not  paid  for  working  in  that  par- 
ticular state,  but  is  paid  for  producing  some  ar- 
ticle, (the  article  produced  being  the  crucial  and 
fundamental  thing — not  the  place  of  produc- 
tion), and  if  the  article  so  produced  is  predeter- 
mined  to   enter   into   interstate   commerce   rela- 


Absolute 

State 

Control 

Where  Stole 

Law  Can 

Properly 

Overate, 

viz: — Within 

Border-lives 

of  That 

State. 


State 

Revenues 

Retained- 

Expenses 

Reduced. 


"Equal    Op- 
portunity' 
Proposals 
as  Applied 
to  Child 
Labor. 


L9 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


The  Article 
Produced  Is 

the  Funda- 
mental 

Thing— Not 
the  Place  of 

Production. 


tions,  all  law  relative  to  that  child  labor  should 
be  Federal,  and  naturally  so,  because  the  pro- 
duct of  that  child's  labor  is  sold  in  interstate 
commerce  and  comes  in  competition  with  the 
product  of  every  other  laborer  in  every  other 
state  of  the  Union. 

Note  the  injustice  of  permitting  the  lax  laws  of 
Georgia  relative  to  age  or  hours  of  labor  to  destroy  or 
cripple  a  similar  industry  in  Massachusetts.  A  mill  in 
Massachusetts  obeying  a  just  child  labor  law  of  that  state 
relative  to  hours  and  age  of  employment  may  be  driven 
out  of  business  by  a  mill  in  Georgia  exploiting  the  labor 
of  young  children,  and  the  passing  of  a  proper  law  in 
one  state  may  be  prevented  by  the  knowledge  that  if  its 
neighbor  state  does  not  co-operate  it  will  rob  the  progres- 
sive state  of  its  industries. 

Exactly  the  same  principle  applies  to  the  hours  of 
labor  of  women  and  children,  and  to  the  establishment  of 
a  minimum  wage  for  women,  and  indeed  to  the  hours  of 
employment  of  all  operatives.  Each  and  every  worker 
is  paid  for  producing  some  thing  or  some  article,  and  if 
they  did  not  produce  some  article  they  would  not  be  em- 
ployed; therefore  necessarily  it  is  the  article  produced 
that  is  the  crucial  thing,  and  not  the  place  of  production. 
That  "some  thing"  or  article  produced,  when  it  is  con- 
nected with  a  predetermined  and  declared  interstate  com- 
merce business,  becomes  a  factor  in  interstate  commerce 
and  as  such  has  an  interstate  application  (even  while  be- 
ing domiciled  within  the  border-line  of  a  particular  state) 
that  makes  it  imperative  that  the  laws  for  labor  relative 
to  all  such  operatives  shall  also  be  interstate  or  Federal. 

Then  all  important  manufacturers  in  all  states  will 
have,  as  they  should  have,  one  set  of  national  laws  relative 
to  labor,  working  hours,  etc.,  instead  of  having,  as  at 
present,  hundreds  and  hundreds  of  laws,  and  many  of 
them  entirely  contrary  and  conflicting.  And,  as  stated 
before,  when  we  put  such  operatives  engaged  in  producing 

[20] 


E  Q   r    A    I.       O    P    V   0   R   T    V    N    I   T  Y       FOR       ALL 


articles  which  arc  predetermined  to  travel  in  interstate 
commerce  under  a  set  of  Federal  laws,  all  the  present 
obnoxious  conditions  disappear  and  we  have  one  set  of 
laws,  bringing  justice,  equity,  and  "Equal  Opportunity" 
for  all  citizens,  including  operatives  and  employers  alike, 
and  at  the  same  time  we  strike  a  tremendous  blow  at  the 
present  advantages  enjo\Ted  by  a  special  privileged  class. 

Example  Xo.  J.  Take  the  strike  troubles  in  the  coal 
mines  of  Pemmlvania  some  years  ago,  and  in  those  of 
Colorado  in  April,  1914.  In  the  latter  instance,  strikers 
were  shooting  down  workers,  and  deputies  of  the  mine 
owners  and  the  state  militia  were  shooting  down  strikers 
and  even  non-participating  women  and  children,  and  con- 
ditions were  so  chaotic  that  the  Governor  of  the  State  of 
Colorado  was  compelled  to  request  aid  of  Federal  troops, 
and  the  Federal  Government  sent  troops  into  the  State  of 
Colorado  to  restore  order.  Why  should  either  Pennsyl- 
vania or  Colorado  control  conditions  at  the  mines  when 
the  products  of  those  mines  not  only  are  used  throughout 
the  nation,  and  hence  are  far  more  of  general  than  of  local 
or  individual  state  interest,  but  are  vital  to  the  very  life 
of  the  nation  and  to  that  of  every  man,  woman,  and  child 
within  it?  Under  such  conditions  the  location  of  the  mine 
is  of  absurdly  small  importance ;  whereas  the  final  disposi- 
tion of  the  article  produced  in  the  mine  is  of  overwhelming 
importance.  Under  our  proposals  if  the  product  of  the 
mines  is  predetermined  and  predeclared  to  go  into  inter- 
state commerce,  all  law  relative  to  the  mines,  the  mine 
owners,  the  miners,  the  hours  of  labor,  equipment  for 
safety,  health,  etc. — all  must  be  Federal.  With  one  set 
of  laws  for  the  same  thing  everywhere,  and  that  set  of  laws 
dictated  by  the  interests  of  the  nation,  which  as  an  entirety 
is  interested  therein,  we  achieve  at  one  stroke  simplicity, 
equality,  and  justice,  for  no  private  interest  should  have 
paramount  authority  to  dominate  the  control  of  coal. 
There  would  be  sane  and  just  Federal  laws  for  miner  as 
well  as  for  mine  owner.  One  of  these  laws  would  no  doubt 
provide  for  the  creation  of  a  Federal  Conciliatory  or  Ar- 

[21  ] 


"Equal  Op- 
portunity'' 
Proposals  as 
Applied   to 
Recent  Coal 
Strikes  in 
Pennsylvania 
and 
Colorado. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Claimed 

Power  of 

Special 

Interests 

Over 

Individual 

States, 

Courts,  Etc. 


"Equal  Op- 
portunity" 
as  Applied 
to  Ex- 
changes, 
Cotton, 
Produce, 
Cold  Stor- 
age, Etc. 


bitration  Board,  for  the  adjustment  of  disputes  in  all 
coal  mines  engaged  in  production  for  interstate  use  within 
the  United  States.  Such  a  board  would  settle  and  fix  all 
question  of  wages  and  hours  of  labor,  and  its  ruling  would 
be  binding  on  both  miners  and  mine  owners.  As  there 
would  be  but  one  set  of  Federal  laws,  the  duties  of  the 
mine  owners  and  operatives  would  be  plain  and  known  to 
the  Government  and  to  all  parties.  The  Government 
would  certainly  see  to  it  that  the  miner  had  his  full  share 
of  compensation.  In  case  of  non-fulfillment,  by  either 
mine  owner  or  miner,  of  proper  conditions  as  set  forth  by 
Federal  law,  the  Federal  Government  would  step  in  and 
operate  the  mine,  at  any  rate  for  a  time,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  entire  people  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  claimed  that  some  of  the  special  interests,  whether 
of  capital  or  of  labor,  are  so  powerful  financially  and  poli- 
tically that  they  can  control  some  of  the  individual  states, 
in  regard  to  securing  certain  decisions  in  State  Courts, 
and  having  laws  passed  by  State  Legislatures  favorable  to 
their  desires.  Our  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  Federal 
Law  Plan  absolutely  prevents  this,  as  all  law  for  the  coal 
mine,  the  coal  owner,  and  the  coal  miners,  if  the  product 
is  predetermined  to  be  interstate,  would  be  Federal,  and 
consequently  there  would  be  no  opportunity  for  any  "spe- 
cial interests"  to  corrupt  or  pervert  any  individual  State 
Court  or  Legislature. 

Example  No.  3.  Take  the  Cotton  Exchange,  which  is 
incorporated  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
There  never  has  been  one  single  pound  of  cotton  com- 
mercially grown  in  the  State  of  New  York.  If  the  Cotton 
Exchange  wants  to  operate  under  the  New  York  State 
Corporation  Law,  then  it  should  confine  its  dealing  only  to 
cotton  grown  within  the  border-lines  of  New  York  State 
itself.  If,  however,  it  wants  to,  as  it  does  now,  deal  in 
interstate  cotton  grown  in  the  Southern  or  other  states, 
then  it  must  declare  such  interstate  intention  and  be  com- 
pelled to  work  under  Federal  law. 

[22] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


The  same  applies  to  all  Exchanges,  such  as  the  Pro- 
duce Exchange  and  other  Exchanges  or  Associations  deal- 
ing in  or  handling  provisions  entering  into  interstate  com- 
merce, such  as  cold  storage  companies,  etc. 

Cold  storage  warehouses  were  meant  to  be  a  blessing 
to  conserve  perishable  food  for  time  of  scarcity.  They 
have  turned  out  to  be  a  curse  to  our  people  because  with 
the  confusion  and  chaos  of  conflicting  jurisdictions  under 
forty-eight  different  State  laws, —  with  the  Federal  au- 
thority forty-nine  different  masters  both  in  law  and  in 
fact, — foodstuffs  of  all  kinds  can  be  indefinitely  held  in 
cold  storage  and  the  cost  of  living  advanced  as  of  late  by 
leaps  and  bounds.  New  York  State  Commissioner  Joseph 
Hartigan, — Commissioner  on  Weights  and  Measures  and 
Secretary  of  the  Mayor  of  New  York's  Committee  on 
food  supplies, — issued  a  statement  on  November  30th, 
1916,  in  which  he  said: 

"The  egg  boycott,  while  not  at  its  height  yet, 
is  gaining  ground  fast.  It  is  proving  an  effective 
weapon  to  decrease  demand  and  lower  prices.  It 
promotes  economy  in  the  use  of  eggs,  and  it  con- 
tributes in  the  stoppage  of  waste. 

"We  need  a  national  cold  storage  law.  Cold 
storage  was  meant  to  be  a  blessing,  to  conserve 
perishable  food  for  time  of  scarcity.  Such 
abuses  have  crept  in  through  its  connection  with 
gambling  food  interests,  as  to  bring  the  system 
under  suspicion. 

"There  is  an  association  of  seventy-five  cold 
storage  plants  which  covers  the  States  of  New 
York,  New  Jersey,  Connecticut,  Delaware  and 
Maryland.  It  is  possible  under  the  secret  work- 
ings of  this  association  to  keep  food  products  in 
cold  storage  for  an  indefinite  time,  which,  linked 
up  with  the  gambling  interests  in  foodstuffs, 
makes  for  higher  prices  to  the  consumer." 

[23] 


High  Cost 
of  Living 
and  Cold, 
Storage  of 
Foodstuffs. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Gambling    in 

Foodstuffs 

Is   Gambling 

With   the 

Very  Life 

Blood  of 

Our  People. 


In  other  words,  foodstuffs  may  be,  through  cold  stor- 
age warehouse  facilities  and  combinations,  placed  into 
the  hands  of  gambling  interests  and  the  cost  of  living  "sky- 
rocketed" to  the  immense  detriment  of  all  our  people,  and 
yet  with  our  forty-nine  conflicting  jurisdictions  abso- 
lutely nothing  effective  can  be  done  at  the  present  time 
to  prevent  this  appalling  evil. 

It  is  claimed  that  foodstuffs  are  sometimes  retained 
in  cold  storage  for  a  year  and  over.  When  any  govern- 
ment allows  such  gambling  in  foodstuffs  it  is  gambling 
with  the  very  life  blood  of  its  own  people  and  consequently 
either  there  must  be  a  change  in  our  confusion  of  laws 
and  jurisdictions — which  allow  such  a  condition  to  exist 
— or  our  government  cannot  endure;  as  any  government 
unable  to  prevent  such  fundamentally  vital  evils  is  but 
a  limping  government  which  in  time  must  totter  and  fall. 

The  New  York  State  Committee  on  foodstuffs  recently 
reported  in  favor  of  governmental  supervision  of  produc- 
tion, transportation  and  distribution  as  a  cure  for  exist- 
ing cold  storage  evils.  Our  Equal  Opportunity  proposals 
accomplish  in  effect  just  this  result.  New  York  City  and 
all  our  large  cities  are  being  fed  by  other  states  of  the 
Union  as  far  West  as  Nebraska  and  the  Dakotas.  It  is 
impossible  therefore  for  any  individual  state  laws  to 
properly  operate  as  the  interests  of  the  whole  people  of 
the  Union  are  vitally  concerned  and  are  in  the  balance. 

How  would  our  "Equal  Opportunity"  proposals  cure 
this  great  and  growing  evil?  The  cold  storage  associa- 
tions under  our  proposals  could  neither  sell  outside  nor 
receive  from  outside  the  State  any  foodstuffs  unless  fed- 
erally incorporated;  consequently  they  must  all  be  so 
incorporated  if  a  corporation ;  or  federally  licensed  if  a 
firm  or  individual.  A  Federal  law  would  make  it  a  mis- 
demeanor to  keep  certain  foodstuffs  in  cold  storage 
beyond  a  certain  period  of  time  and  make  it  compulsory 
to  stamp  the  date  of  entry  on  all  foodstuffs  in  cold  stor- 
age. This  and  further  Federal  laws  forbidding  gambling 
in  foodstuffs  would  effectively  cure  this  great  and  rapidly 
growing  evil  among  us. 

r  24.  i 


E  Q  IT  A   I,       O  P  P  O  It  T   U  N   I  T  Y       FOR       ALL 


Another  great  beneficial  result  of  our  Equal  Oppor- 
tunity proposals  would  be  that  commission  merchants 
handling  products  of  the  farmers  from  all  over  the  Coun- 
try would  be  subject  to  uniform  Federal  regulation,  where- 
b}'  the  farmer  making  said  shipments  would  be  impartially 
protected. 

The  New  York  Stock  Exchange  deals  in  stocks,  bonds, 
and  securities  of  companies  in  all  states,  and  is,  therefore, 
dealing  in  interstate  securties,  and  consequently  under  our 
proposals  would  be  compelled  to  operate  only  under  Fed- 
eral law,  or  confine  its  dealings  to  securities,  etc.,  of  the 
State  of  New  York.  With  such  Federal  control  one  set 
of  laws  would  control  all  the  actions  of  such  Stock  Ex- 
changes, whereas,  now — the  New  York  Stock  Exchange 
being  merely  an  association  of  individuals  and  not  incor- 
porated— neither  the  government  nor  the  state  can  prac- 
tically have  any  control  over  them.  Please  note  that 
although  the  New  York  Stock  Exchange  is  located  or 
domiciled  in  New  York  City,  it  is  dealing  in  securities  of 
different  states,  therefore  interstate  securities,  also  the 
market  which  it  furnishes  is  interstate,  as  orders  are  re- 
ceived from  all  states  by  wire,  phone,  and  mail,  and  it 
affects  materially  the  development  of  industries  and  trans- 
portation throughout  every  state  of  the  Union. 

With  Federal  control  of  the  Stock  Exchanges  and 
Federal  incorporation  of  all  corporations,  and  Federal 
license  of  all  individuals  or  concerns  which  predetermine 
and  declare  to  do  an  interstate  commerce  business — which, 
of  course,  would  include  all  interstate  transportation 
means  or  companies  and  all  telephone  and  telegraph  com- 
panies— many  of  the  worst  abuses  of  the  Wall  Street  mani- 
pulators and  railroad  barons  could  immediately  be  cured. 

All  of  the  American  people,  and  indeed  all  the  nations 
of  the  World,  know  that,  particularly  in  the  last  forty 
years,  securities  in  the  United  States  in  the  forms  of  bonds 
and  stocks  of  corporations  and  of  interstate  transporta- 
tion lines  have  often  been  pyramided  on  inflated  values, 

[26] 


Protection 
to  the 
Farmers. 


"Equal  Op- 
portunity" 
Proposals  ax 
Applied  to 
New   York 
Stock  Ex- 
change and 
Wall  Street 
Manipu- 
lators. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Our  Pro- 
posals   Will 
Prevent 
Exploita- 
tions of 
'Gold-brick" 
Stocks  to 
the  Detri- 
ment of 
the  People. 


many  times  their  true  worth,  and  palmed  off  on  the  public 
to  the  public's  great  detriment  and  loss,  and  to  the 
tremendous  profit  of  the  manipulators  or  railroad  barons, 
and  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  many  of  the  greatest 
fortunes  in  the  United  States  have  been  so  made. 

With  one  set  of  Federal  Laws  for  such  companies  and 
Federal  control  of  the  Stock  Exchange,  we  can  follow  the 
simple  law  of  England,  which  has  been  her  law  for  many 
years,  and  which  in  effect  operates  as  follows :  The 
English  Government  says  in  effect  that  no  one  shall  sell 
"gold-brick"  stocks  or  securities  unknown  to  the  public; 
therefore,  it  is  provided  that  anyone  who  wishes  to  incor- 
porate a  company  or  to  increase  the  stock  of  any  cor- 
poration or  concern  the  stock  or  bonds  of  which  are  to  be 
sold  at  a  public  exchange,  must  state  in  a  publicly  adver- 
tised announcement  exactly  what  was  paid  for  the  prop- 
erty in  question,  from  whom  it  was  purchased,  and  other 
full  details,  and  a  statement  of  this  kind  is  filed  with  a 
certain  bureau  of  the  Government.  False  statements  are 
punishable  by  severe  jail  sentences.  For  argument  sake 
we  will  say  that  you  buy  a  railroad  for  one  million  dollars. 
You  desire  to  incorporate  it  at  five  millions.  You  must 
then  state  from  whom  you  purchased  it,  state  the  reason 
why  you  consider  that  your  management  is  going  to  make 
the  property  worth,  instead  of  one  million,  five  millions, 
and  after  doing  that  and  giving  full  advertised  notice  to 
the  public  that  there  are  four  millions  of  water  in  the 
proposition,  if  the  public  choose  to  buy  the  stock  they  are 
at  liberty  to  do  so.  In  other  words,  the  Government  of 
England  does  not  allow  promoters  or  stock  jobbers  to 
pyramid  values  and  sell  "gold-brick"  stocks  to  the  public 
without  letting  them  know  exactly  what  they  are  purchas- 
ing, and  with  one  set  of  Federal  laws  for  all  such  com- 
panies the  same  result  exactly,  for  the  protection  of  the 
public,  could  be  obtained  here  with  little  or  no  trouble  or 
difficulty. 

Under  our  proposed  plan  such  financial  disasters  as 
recently  occurred  in  the  New  York,  New  Haven,  and  Hart- 

[26] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


ford  Railroad  stocks  would  hardly  be  possible,  because 
with  a  general  Federal  statute  similar  to  the  English  law, 
the  price  paid  for  any  railroad  or  trolley  line  by  another 
company  whose  stock  is  sold  to  the  public  would  have  to 
be  given  in  full,  with  the  terms,  to  a  Federal  Board  and 
also  be  advertised  in  certain  papers.  This  would  immedi- 
ately let  in  the  searchlight  of  publicity  and  investigation, 
making  impossible  any  such  looting  of  so  great  a  property 
and  the  resultant  tremendous  losses  to  so  many  innocent 
investors.  In  this  connection,  too,  it  is  interesting  to  note 
that  the  dispute  between  the  Federal  Department  of  Jus- 
tice and  the  directors  of  this  very  New  York,  New  Haven, 
and  Hartford  Railroad  Company  finally  hinged  on  the 
point  that  the  State  of  Massachusetts  claimed  a  right  to 
buy  the  stock  of  the  Boston  &  Maine  Railroad  Company, 
although  only  a  part  of  the  lines  of  the  latter  company 
are  within  the  borders  of  the  State  of  Massachusetts. 
That  state  should  have  no  control  whatever  over  an  inter- 
state railroad  in  which  the  people  of  the  several  states  all 
have  a  direct  and  important  interest. 


Such 

Disasters 
as  Recent 
N.  Y.,  N.  H. 
f  11.  ft.  R. 
Would  Be 
Impossible 
Under 
"Equal  Op- 
portunity 
for  All" 
Proposals. 


Our  large  life  and  other  insurance  companies  make 
contracts  of  insurance  all  over  the  country,  and  the  people 
of  the  entire  nation  are  deeply  interested  in  them.  Some- 
times the  individual  states  have  made  most  unjust  attacks 
upon  insurance  companies.  Recently,  for  instance,  they 
drove  all  the  fire  insurance  companies  out  of  the  State  of 
Missouri,  and  years  ago  New  Hampshire  passed  a  Valued 
Policy  Law  which  was  most  unfortunate  in  some  of  its 
results.  Again,  we  know  only  too  well,  from  the  experi- 
ence learned  some  few  years  ago,  how  dangerously  in- 
efficient the  control  of  such  life  insurance  companies  bv  a 
state  may  be,  and  when  various  insurance  companies  are 
incorporated  under  the  laws  of  various  states,  all  more  or 
less  contradictory  and  relatively  inequitable,  confusion  be- 
comes truly  worse  confounded,  and  confusion  spells  in- 
equality and  injustice,  both  to  the  company  and  to  the 
insured  alike.  All  insurance  companies  which  predeter- 
mine and  confine  their  activities  within  the  border-lines  of 


Life  and 
Other 
Insurance 
Companies. 


[27  1 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Transpor- 
tation with 
Special 
Benefits  to 
a  Privileged 
Few  or 
"Equal  Op- 
portunity 
to  All." 


If  Railroads 
Had  Been 
in  Existence 
in  1787  They 
Would  Have 
Come  Under 
Same  Fed- 
eral Control 
and  Law 
as  the 
Navigable 
Waterways, 
Said  Law 
Controlling 
and  Operat- 
ing Both 
Within  and 
Without  the 
Individual 
State. 


the  state  wherein  they  are  located  would  be  entirely  under 
state  law,  but  any  insurance  company  that  predetermines 
and  declares  to  do  an  interstate  business  should,  of  course, 
be  under  Federal  law,  and  the  greatest  benefits  possible 
would  accrue,  particularly  in  the  case  of  life  insurance 
companies,  both  to  the  company  and  to  the  insured. 

There  is  little  doubt  that  in  the  United  States,  more 
than  in  any  other  country  in  the  world,  the  great  trusts 
have  fastened  their  hold  upon  the  public  to  the  people's 
great  detriment,  and  this  result  has  been  brought  about 
principally  through  their  ability  to  prevent  competition 
by  annihilating  serious  competitors,  due  to  special  benefits 
and  accruing  advantages  obtained  from  transportation. 

As  stated  before,  the  Constitution  (by  the  implication 
contained  in  its  grant  to  Congress  of  control  over  inter- 
state commerce)  placed  all  navigable  waterways  under 
Federal  control  and  law,  said  law  operating  both  within 
and  without  the  state.  Why  did  they  do  so?  Simply  be- 
cause these  waterways  were  then  the  only  important  exist- 
ing arteries  of  transportation  for  interstate  commerce 
articles.  Now,  if  the  railroads  had  also  been  in  existence 
at  that  time  and  were  then  the  main  arteries  of  transporta- 
tion, instead  of  or  in  addition  to  the  navigable  waterways, 
it  would  seem  absurd  to  say  that  the  railroads  would  not 
have  also  been  understood  from  the  beginning  to  be  in- 
cluded under  the  grant  of  control  over  interstate  com- 
merce. Jurisdiction  over  them  would  consequently  have 
also  been  taken  by  Congress  and  the  Federal  Government, 
exactly  as  such  jurisdiction  was  assumed  over  the  navi- 
gable waterways ;  and  it  is  extremely  probable  that  such 
jurisdiction  would  have  been  given,  by  the  framers  of  the 
Constitution,  over  the  railroads  both  as  to  their  interstate 
and  intrastate  activities;  there  being  just  as  much  reason 
for  this  as  for  giving  to  the  Federal  Government  control 
over  all  matters  of  admiralty.  There  can  be  little  or  no 
question  about  it.  Jurisdiction  over  the  railroads  would 
have  been  so  granted  because  both  the  railroads  and  the 
waterways   would  have  been   existing,   at  that   time,   for 

[28] 


E  Q  U   A    L       O  P   P  O  R  T   U   N    I   T  Y       FOR       A  L  L 


exactly  the  same  purpose  and  function,  to-wit,  to  serve 
as  arteries  of  transportation  for  interstate  articles.  Par- 
ticular attention  is  here  called  to  the  fact  that  it  has  been 
the  general  practice  of  all  civilized  countries  of  the  world 
to  maintain  in  all  ages  their  arteries  of  transportation, 
to-wit,  their  navigable  waterways  and  railroads,  and, 
wherever  established,  their  public  highways,  on  terms  of 
exact  equality  for  all  their  citizens. 

To-day  the  twentieth  century  arteries  of  transporta- 
tion are  principally  the  railroad  means  of  transportation, 
and  the  United  States  must,  if  she  does  her  proper  duty, 
maintain  same  on  exact  terms  of  equality  to  all,  just  the 
same  as  England,  Germany,  and  France,  etc.,  to-day  see 
to  it  that  their  railroad  means  of  transportation  are  main- 
tained on  terms  of  absolute  equality  to  all. 

How  has  it  been  with  us  in  the  past,  and  how  is  it 
to-day?  It  is  common  history  now  that  in  the  earlier  days 
of  our  railroading,  certain  advantages  were  given  by  way 
of  direct  rebate ;  to-day,  although  in  other  forms  than 
direct  rebating,  the  advantages  to  a  privileged  few  are 
greater  than  ever,  for,  notwithstanding  the  laws  against 
rebating  or  allowing  advantages  to  one  shipper,  not  ob- 
tainable by  another,  there  is  no  one  familiar  with  this 
subject  who  does  not  know  that  certain  trusts  and  a  pri- 
vileged few  have  tremendous  special  advantages  in  trans- 
portation over  the  ordinary  plain  manufacturer  or  con- 
cern, whether  it  be  in  the  following  forms  of  indirect  rebat- 
ing or  other  modifications  thereof,  viz : 

In  pipe  lines  running  on  a  railroad's  prop- 
erty and  the  charging  of  higher  prices  for  all 
other  modes  of  transportation. 

In  bookkeeping  systems  relative  to  railroad 
supplies  bought. 

In  warehouse  costs,  privileges,  or  advan- 
tages. 

In  private  ownership  of  railroad  cars,  small 
railroads,  etc.     In  refusal  to  run  a  siding  from 

[29] 


Railroads 
the  Twen- 
tieth Cen- 
tury Ar- 
teries of 
Commerce. 


Railroading 

and 

Rebating. 


Methods  of 

Indirect 

Rebating. 


Benefits  of  a 
Privileged 

Few. 


Iniquitous 
Antharcite 

Coal 
Combine 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

the  railroad  to  competitive  coal  mines,  or  coal, 
mineral,  or  fruit  lands.  In  refusal  of  cars  to 
such  competitive  concerns,  or  giving  insufficient 
number  of  cars  to  commercially  move  their  pro- 
ducts. 

In  railroad  affiliation  and  control  over  allied 
concerns,  as  is  evidenced  in  the  anthracite  coal 
combine  where,  by  indirect  methods,  a  system  of 
tremendous  advantages  (indirect  rebates)  ac- 
crues to  a  privileged  few. 

The  Anthracite  Coal  Combine  is  one  of  the  most 
iniquitous  conspiracies  of  modern  times,  resulting  in  much 
injury  to  the  great  majority  of  our  people.  The  system 
used,  although  not  understood  by  many,  is  perfectly 
simple.  The  invisible,  but  none  the  less  real,  railroad 
affiliation  and  control  of  anthracite  coal  mines  so  arranges 
matters  that  there  is  little  or  no  profit  to  any  concern 
from  the  actual  working  of  said  mines  alone,  but  that 
there  is  a  profit  to  the  railroad  in  freight  charges  in  many 
cases  of  from  200  to  300  per  cent. — simply  another  form 
of  freight  advantages  to  a  privileged  few,  and  therefore 
only  another  form  of  indirect  rebating. 

Thus  have  the  railroads  and  their  allied  concerns 
stifled  independent  anthracite  coal  competition,  and  con- 
trolled for  themselves  75  to  80  per  cent,  of  said  coal  min- 
ing. This  control  started  in  the  3^ear  1898.  The  fol- 
lowing table  shows  the  tremendous  advances  of  coal  prices 
(and  resultant  burden  to  the  people)  since  the  said  control 
was  established,  and   is  most   illuminating: 


Wholesale  Prices  at  Tidewater 


Table 

Showing 

in  Coal 

Prices. 

Egg  Coal 

Chestnut       

Percentage 
of      advance 
since   forma- 
tion of  trusts 
or   combines. 
1898.      1912.     1913.     1914.     1915.     1916. 
$3,096     $5.25     $5.30    $5.30    $5.30     $6.82     120.  % 
2.97         5.50       5.55       5.55       5.55       6.94     133.7% 


:io 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


So  the  benefits  to  certain  privileged  classes  exist  to-day 
just  the  same,  only  they  involve  much  larger  amounts 
than  under  the  old-time  direct  railroad  rebating  system 
because  of  the  greater  business  now  transacted. 

Some  one,  however,  may  say  all  this  is  overdrawn;  it 
is  impossible  for  any  railroad  to  charge  200  to  300  per 
cent,  profit  for  hauling  coal  from  Pennsylvania  to  the 
seaboard ;  neither  can  freight  rebates  be  made  to-day.  To 
any  such  we  furnish  absolute  proofs,  viz: — Report  and 
findings  of  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  August, 
1915: 

The  commission  denounces  certain  practices  of  the 
coal-canning  roads  and  makes  a  drastic  order  against 
further  continuance  of  them.  The  decision  deals  with 
these  matters  in  the  following  findings,  as  stated  in  the 
syllabus  of  the  decision  : 

"The  respondents,  by  means  of  trackage  arrangements 
and  the  free  transportation  to  junction  points  in  the  min- 
ing regions  of  coal  exchanged  by  their  allied  coal  com- 
panies, have  extended  the  advantages  of  interline  trans- 
portation to  their  coal  companies,  to  the  prejudice  of 
other  coal  shippers  to  whom  interline  transportation  at 
joint  rates  have  been  denied.  Respondents  are  required 
to  establish  through  routes  and  publish  joint  through 
rates  applicable  thereto. 

"Anthracite  coal  is  a  low-grade  commodity,  which  is 
transported  in  vast  quantities  in  trains  of  maximum  ton- 
nage. The  tonnage  loaded  in  each  car  is  much  greater 
than  the  loading  of  most  other  classes  of  traffic.  Most  of 
the  anthracite  tonnage  is  shipped  from  collieries  whose 
daily  production,  measured  in  carloads,  is  very  large. 
These  conditions  tend  toward  lower  operating  costs. 

"Concessions  and  offsets  granted  by  respondents  to 
their  allied  coal  companies  in  the  form  of  interest  charges, 
royalty  earnings,  the  use  of  valuable  property  at  inade- 
quate  rentals,   the   free   use   of   the   carriers"    funds   and 


Decision  of 

Interstate 

Commerce 

Commission. 

August, 

1915. 


Unlawful 
Concessions 
— Unlawful 
Rebates. 


31 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

credit,  or  by  other  means,  are  as  pernicious  as  direct  cash 
rebates.     Such  concessions  and  offsets  are  unlawful. 

"Lateral  allowances  paid  to  a  coal  shipper  in  ac- 
cordance with  an  agreement,  alleged  to  be  additional  com- 
pensation for  the  use  of  a  facilit}^  furnished  by  the  shipper, 
are  unlawful  rebates." 

The  railroads  made  respondents  in  the  case  are  the 
Central  Railroad  of  New  Jersey ;  Philadelphia  &  Reading ; 
the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western ;  Lehigh  Valley ; 
Erie;  Wilkesbarre  &  Eastern;  New  York,  Susquehanna  & 
Western ;  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western ;  the  Pennsyl- 
vania ;  the  Northern  Central ;  and  the  Delaware  &  Hudson. 


Inter  Com- 
pany Rail- 
road Invest- 
ments to 
Equalize 
Interest. 


Attacks  Coal  Control  by  Railroads. 

The  commission  takes  the  opportunity,  in  the  conclu- 
sion of  its  consideration  of  the  case,  to  express  an  opinion 
of  the  manner  in  which  the  railroads  have  exercised 
ownership  and  control  of  coal  properties.     It  says : 

"We  cannot  overlook  the  fact  that  some  force  has 
brought  the  production  and  sale  of  most  of  the  tonnage 
of  this  commodity  under  their  control.  If  they  established 
excessive  rates  on  anthracite  they  became  the  beneficiaries 
of  conditions  which  were  prejudicial  to  the  business  of  the 
individual  operator  or  shipper.  The  power  to  fix  freight 
rates  on  this  commodity  was  the  opportunity  to  confiscate 
property  if  the  carrier  so  willed. 

"Since  1908  the  Delaware  &  Hudson  Company  has 
invested  $15,000,000  in  the  securities  of  electric  railways 
and  $6,000,000  in  anthracite  coal  lands.  We  have  re- 
ferred to  the  Erie's  bond  issue  of  $32,000,000  in  1901, 
representing  its  investment  in  the  Pennsylvania  Coal  Com- 
pany, and  the  bond  issue  of  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad 
in  1905,  representing  its  investment  of  $17,000,000  in 
the  property  of  Cox  Brothers  &  Co.  We  have  referred 
to  the  fact  that  several  of  these  carriers  are  guarantors 
of  the  bonds  of  the  Temple  Iron  Company.     The  Central 

[32] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

Railroad  Company  of  New  Jersey  is  guarantor  of  $16,- 
000,000  bonds  issued  by  the  Lehigh  and  Wilkesbarre  Coal 
Company,  and  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad  Company  is 
guarantor  of  $11,500,000  bonds  issued  by  the  Lehigh 
Valley  Coal  Company.  Giving  consideration  to  these 
matters  and  to  the  investment  made  by  these  carriers  in 
the  stocks  and  bonds  of  the  coal  companies  and  the  un- 
secured loans  and  advances  they  have  extended  to  the  coal 
companies,  it  is  apparent  that  the  capital  borrowed  by 
these  carriers  is  not  only  the  capital  required  for  their 
transportation  needs,  but  also  the  capital  required  to 
mine  and  market  80  per  cent,  of  the  70,000,000  tons  of 
anthracite  coal  produced  annually. 


Practices  Called  Inherently  Unlawful. 

"After  a  careful  review  of  the  record  we  are  impressed 
with  the  inherent  unlawfulness  of  the  rates  and  practices 
established  by  these  carriers,  which  clearly  are  the  out- 
growth of  past  conditions,  wherein  the  carriers  were  pro- 
ducers, shippers,  transporters,  and  vendors  of  the  com- 
modity. If  the  rates  they  established  for  transportation 
were  excessive,  it  resulted  in  no  hardship  to  their  mining 
and  selling  operations,  because  the  excessive  profits  from 
the  transportation  service  offset  the  absence  of  profits  in 
their  mining  and  selling  operations  and  high  rates  elimi- 
nated the  competing  shipper  from  the  markets. 

"If  the  record  in  this  case  were  barren  of  evidence  as 
to  income,  revenues,  and  low  operating  costs  resulting 
from  the  transportation  of  this  commodity,  the  mandatory 
language  of  the  act  to  regulate  commerce  would  require 
removal  of  the  unlawful  discrimination,  preferences,  and 
advantages  which  have  for  many  years  been  extended  by 
these  carriers  to  their  allied  and  controlled  coal  companies 
and  which  operate  to  the  prejudice  of  the  individual 
shippers  of  this  commodity. 

"The  conduct  of  these  carriers,  extending  over  a  long 
period  of  years,  in  granting  to  their  allied  coal  companies 

[33] 


Unlawful- 
ness  of 
Rates  aud 
Practices   of 
Railroad 
Carriers. 

Excessive 
Profits  of 
Rates  of 
Transporta- 
tion Offset 
Absence  of 
Profits   from 
M  ining. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

concessions  from,  and  offsets  against,  their  established 
tariff  rates,  presents  very  strong  evidence  that  the  rates 
on  anthracite  coal,  which  these  carriers  established,  are 
excessive.  These  coal  companies  ship  80  per  cent,  of  the 
total  production,  and  if  a  substantial  reduction  is  made 
in  the  tariff  rates  its  full  effect  will  fall  upon  but  20  per 
cent,  of  the  tonnage  shipped.  If  the  great  purpose  of  the 
act  to  regulate  commerce  is  to  be  carried  out,  we  must 
require  that  such  tariff  rates  on  this  commodity  shall  be 
established  as  can  be  maintained  on  the  shipments  of  all 
shippers." 


Rebating 

in   favor 

Lehigh 

Goal  |" 

Navigation 

Co.,  from 

New  York 

Times,  Mar. 

12,  1915. 


JERSEY   CENTRAL   FACES 

PENALTY  OF   $4,000,000 


Convicted  on  185  Counts  of  Rebating  to  Lehigh  Coal  & 
Navigation  Co. 


{Special  to  the  New  York  Times.) 

Trenton,  N.  J.,  March  11,  1915.— The  Central  Rail- 
road of  New  Jersey  was  found  guilty  by  a  jury  in  the 
United  States  Court  here  to-day  on  185  separate  counts, 
charging  the  granting  of  rebates  and  concessions  to  the 
Lehigh  Coal  &  Navigation  Company  on  shipments  of 
coal  from  Pennsylvania  to  points  in  New  Jersey  and 
New  York. 

The  Federal  Government  will  demand  the  full  penalty 
for  the  offenses.  This  amounts  to  about  $4,000,000,  and 
a  fine  for  this  amount  may  be  imposed  when  sentence  is 
pronounced  later.  The  minimum  fine  for  185  counts  is 
$185,000. 

The  indictment  against  the  Central  Railroad  of  New 
Jersey  was  found  on  December  1st,  under  the  Elkins  Act. 
Investigators  of  the  Department  of  Justice  found  that 
the  Lehigh  Coal  &  Navigation  Company  had  an  agree- 
ment with  the  Central  Railroad  of  New  Jersey  by  which 

[34] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

it  received  what  were  termed  on  the  books  as  "lateral 
allowances."  These  allowances  were  made  only  under 
specific  circumstances,  which  took  into  account  certain 
amounts  of  freight  hauled,  and  also  specific  destinations. 
It  was  charged  by  the  investigators  that  through  this 
indirect  method  of  favoring  a  specific  coal  company  the 
railroad  has  discriminated  in  favor  of  the  Lehigh  Coal  & 
Navigation  Company  as  far  back  as  1871. 


AS   IN   ANTHRACITE  COAL,   SO  IN 

MEAT   PACKING   TRANSPORTATION 


Chicago,  Nov.  11th,  1916. — Fines  totalling  more  than 
$171,000  were  assessed  by  Federal  Judge  Landis  to-day 
against  Swift  &  Co.,  packers,  and  several  railroads,  con- 
victed of  violating  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act.  In  most 
of  the  cases  the  charges  were  rebating  or  shipping  less 
than  carload  shipments  at  carload  rates. 

Swift  &  Co.  were  fined  $60,000 ;  the  Pennsylvania  Rail- 
road, $20,000;  the  Elgin,  Joliet  &  Eastern  Railroad, 
$20,000,  and  the  Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St. 
Louis  Railroad,  $20,000  in  one  case  and  $50,000  in  an- 
other. 

In  addition,  fines  ranging  from  $100  to  $1,000  were 
assessed  against  the  Chicago  &  Northwestern  Railroad, 
the  Indiana  Harbor  Belt  Railroad  and  the  Chicago,  Mil- 
waukee &  St.  Paul.  These  fines  were  in  most  instances  for 
failure  to  comply  with  the  twenty-eight-hour  cattle  lav/. 

The  Pennsylvania  fine  and  the  $20,000  fine  against 
the  Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  were  for 
rebating  to  the  W.  H.  Merritt  Company,  a  Chicago  Board 
of  Trade  firm,  while  the  $50,000  fine  was  for  rebating  to 
B.  A.  Eckhart,  head  of  the  Eckhart  Milling  Compan}'. 
Mr.  Eckhart  was  tried  for  the  same  offence  some. time  ago, 
but  the  case  was  thrown  out  of  court  by  Federal  Judge 
Anderson. 

[35] 


Rebatiny 
to  Large 
Meat 
Packers. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Our  Pro- 
posals Cure 
for  Direct 
or  Indirect 
Railroad 
Rebating. 


Under  our  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  plan,  every 
transportation  line  or  railroad  predetermining  and  pre- 
declaring  to  engage  in  interstate  commerce  transportation 
(and  unless  they  so  determined  and  declared,  the}'  could 
not  engage  in  any  interstate  commerce  transportation) 
would  be  Federally  incorporated  and  under  one  Federal  set 
of  laws,  which  would  give  the  Federal  Government  power 
over  said  transportation  lines,  both  within  and  without 
the  individual  states,  equal  to  the  power  it  now  exercises 
over  the  National  banks ;  and  no  one  gainsays  that  the 
government  can  and  does  make  the  National  banks  com- 
pletely fulfill  their  proper  duties  to  the  government  and 
the  people. 


If  the  Federal  Government  controls  the  National 
banks,  why  should  it  not  also  control  the  interstate  trans- 
portation lines,  'particularly  as  the  latter  are  far  more 
interstate  in  function  and  fact  than  are  the  National 
banks? 


Government 
Supervision 
and  Control 
of  all 
Interstate 
Means  of 
Trans- 
portation. 


With  one  set  of  Federal  laws,  the  government,  if  need 
be,  can  place  government  officers  in  every  transportation 
line  of  the  country,  to  report  to  the  Department  of  Justice 
any  action,  direct  or  indirect,  that  would  tend  to  give  any 
advantage  whatsoever  to  anyone  in  transportation  costs. 
In  fact,  the  Federal  laws  could  then  be,  and  should  be,  so 
severe  that  if  any  interstate  transportation  line  did,  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  or  in  any  manner  whatsoever,  give  to 
anyone  advantages  in  transportation  costs,  its  managing 
officers  should  be  subject  to  jail  sentence  for  a  term  of 
}Tears,  also,  it  should  lose  its  charter,  and  could,  at  the 
option  of  Congress,  then  be  taken  over  by  the  Federal 
Government. 


Mr.  Alfred  P.  Thorn,  counsel  to  the  Railway  Executive 
Advisory    Committee    in    Washington,    November    25th, 
1916,  speaking  for  the  large  railroads  of  the  Country, 
asked  for  compulsory  Federal  incorporation  of  all  inter- 
im } 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

state  railroads.  So  that  we  see  that  even  the  railroads 
themselves  have  found  that  the  confusion  and  chaos  of 
conflicting  jurisdictions  of  forty-eight  States, — making 
with  the  Federal  authority  forty-nine  masters  with  their 
babel  of  statutes  and  bedlam  of  attempted  regulation  and 
inspection, — has  now  become  simply  unbearable.  I  call 
your  special  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  only  alterna- 
tive to  a  more  centralized  control  and  regulation  of  rail- 
roads is  the  dangerous  experiment  of  government  owner- 
ship and  operation  which  is  undesirable  both  to  labor  and 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  is  entirely  unneces- 
sary if  our  "Equal  Opportunity"  proposals  are  put  into 
force.  So  that  our  proposals,  instead  of  being  revolu- 
tionary and  destructive,  are  but  natural  and  preventive. 

Constituted  as  our  Country  is  politically,  government 
ownership  either  of  transportation  means  or  natural  re- 
sources would  make  for  inefficiency  as  against  the  great 
efficiency  of  private  ownership  or  even  government  owner- 
ship under  a  monarchical  form  of  government, — and  for 
us  to  adopt,  under  our  political  system,  such  government 
ownership,  might  in  time  easily  result  in  great  disaster  or 
even  economic  destruction  of  our  people  and  government. 

The  present  confusion  and  bedlam  of  jurisdiction 
cannot  much  longer  continue  in  railroad  and  other 
transportation  means. 

The  Federal  Government,  through  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission,  has  for  some  years  limited  the  rail- 
roads' freight  and  passenger  rates,  and  hence  has  also 
limited  their  ability  to  make  profit.  This  can  be  borne 
in  the  present  prosperous  times.  Whenever  we  experience, 
however,  a  great  commercial  depression  extending  over  a 
number  of  years,  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  the 
railroads  themselves  will  demand  that  if  the  Federal 
Government  elects  to  limit  the  railroads'  profits  that  it 
must  also  take  the  added  responsibility  of  paying  the 
railroads'  bills,  which  would  mean  Government  ownership 


The 

Railroads 
Themselves 
Now 

Asking  for 
Federal  In- 
corporation. 


47983 


Meant) 
of  Trans- 
portation in 
Germany. 
France,  and 
England. 


In  Germany 
Government 
Ownership 
of  Means 
of  Trans- 
portation 
Prevents 
Discrimi- 
nation. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

of   such    railroad    transportation    means, — the    result    of 
which  would  be  highly  detrimental  to  labor  and  our  people. 

Our  proposals  are  the  only  antidote  we  know  for 
Government  ownership,  which  otherwise  will  come  rapidly 
to  the  front,  and  hence  instead  of  being  revolutionary 
our  proposals  are  intensely  conservative  and,  if  adopted, 
will  prevent  the  great  calamity  under  our  political  system 
of  Government  ownership  of  our  transportation  means. 

To  prove  that  Federal  law  for  all  means  of  interstate 
transportation,  with  rigid  government  control  and  super- 
vision, would  absolutely  prohibit  any  transportation  ad- 
vantages to  anyone,  we  have  only  to  compare  the  United 
States  in  this  regard  with  the  principal  foreign  countries 
of  Europe,  viz : — Germany,  France,  and  England.  The 
trusts  and  combinations  in  these  countries  are  propor- 
tionately even  greater  than  in  the  United  States,  and  yet 
there  is  no  trust  problem  in  the  sense  that  one  set  of  in- 
dividuals is  debarred  from  certain  industries  and  walks 
of  life,  due  to  want  of  obtaining  transportation  ad- 
vantages vouchsafed  to  others. 

In  Germany  all  means  of  transportation  are  owned 
by  the  government,  which  absolutely  guarantees  equality 
to  all  in  transportation  costs.  Notwithstanding  that  Ger- 
many is  the  hot-bed  of  trusts  and  combinations,  still,  due 
to  the  fact  of  maintaining  absolute  equality  to  all  in  trans- 
portation, no  trust  problem  exists  there  to  the  detriment 
of  the  nation  or  its  people. 

Trusts  and  combinations  have  been  formed  in  the  past 
five  to  ten  years  to  a  greater  extent  in  Germany  than  in 
any  other  country  in  the  world. 

The  total  number  of  cartels  (trusts)  in  Ger- 
many is  estimated  at  present  to  be  between  four 
and  five  hundred,  and  the  number  of  articles  con- 
trolled by  them  about  400.  At  present  there  are 
about  a  hundred  international  cartels  (trusts) 
of  which    the  German   cartels   (trusts)    form   a 


38 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


part.  These  cover  a  few  dozen  chemicals,  steel 
rails,  tubes,  rolling  mill  products,  steel  billets, 
wire,  wire  nails,  woven  wire,  needles,  screws, 
enameled  ware,  zinc,  lead,  nickel,  copper,  alum- 
inum, and  the  manufactures  of  these  metals, 
porcelain,  plate  glass,  cement,  kaolin,  rubber 
goods,  clay,  leather  goods,  velvet,  cloth  for  neck- 
ties, silk  thread,  schappe,  mufflers,  illustrated 
postal  cards,  moving  picture  films,  and  a  few 
other  products.  Most  of  the  international 
cartels  of  German}'  are  with  Austria  and  Bel- 
gium, the  most  conspicuous  one  with  France  is 
that  of  the  Velvet  and  Plush  Cartel  (Trust)  of 
Germany,  with  headquarters  at  Crefeld,  with  an 
allied  French  syndicate  with  headquarters  at 
Lyons,  France. 

On  Wednesday,  February  11th,  1914,  Dr.  Karl 
Rathgen,  member  of  the  faculty  of  the  Colonial  Institute 
of  Hamburg,  representing  the  Prussian  Department  of 
Education  in  the  capacity  of  Exchange  Professor  at 
Columbia  University,  New  York  City,  delivered  an  address 
on  "Germany's  Economic  Position."     He  stated  that 

"The  industrial  awakening  of  Germany  oc- 
curred about  twenty  years  ago,  and  since  that 
time  no  other  country  in  the  world  has  made  such 
rapid  industrial  progress." 

Notwithstanding  the  tremendous  formation  of  trusts 
and  combinations  in  Germany  during  the  past  twent}T 
years,  Dr.  Rathgen  states,  relative  thereto,  the  follow- 
ing: 

"The  absence  of  a  'trust  problem'  in  Ger- 
many is  due  in  a  large  measure  to  the  fact  that 
the  government  ownership  of  all  means  of  trans- 
portation has  not  permitted  the  development  of 
a  system  of  discrimination  by  means  of  which 
monopolies  could  be  built  up." 

[39] 


Absence  of 
a  Trust 
Problem  in 
Germany. 


Discrimina- 
tion in  Form 
of  Freight, 
Benefits 
Impossible 
in  Germany. 
Same  Condi- 
tions Will 
Be  Obtained 
Here  Under 
Our  "Equal 
Opportunity 
System." 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


France  and 
England's 
Trans- 
portation 
Means. 


In  France  and  England  the  railroads  and  all  means 
of  transportation  are  under  one  set  of  government  laws, 
and  in  both  these  countries,  through  one  set  of  government 
Federal  laws,  inequalities  in  transportation  costs  are  im- 
possible; and  hence  in  these  countries,  the  same  as  in 
Germany,  although  they  have  proportionately  many  more 
trusts  and  combinations  than  the  United  States,  there 
exists  no  trust  problem  to  the  people's  detriment. 


National 
Resources. 


The  Chief 
Asset  of 
Any  Coun- 
try is  the 
Rising 
Generation. 

The 
Paramount 
Issue — 
Equal  Op- 
portunity 
for  AU. 


One  of  the  most,  if  not  the  most,  serious  menaces  to  our 
country  is  the  inequality  here  of  these  transportation  ad- 
vantages, giving  benefits  to  a  privileged  class  denied  to  all 
others,  xohich,  in  the  industries  of  oil,  coal,  meat,  certain 
food  supplies,  metals,  etc.,  has  acted  to  stifle  all  serious 
legitimate  outside  competition,  thereby  absolutely  pre- 
venting "Equal  Opportunity  for  All." 

The  Federal  Government  should  also  control  the 
ownership  and  development  of  minerals  and  water  powers. 
No  man  has  made,  or  can  make,  them;  but  all  men  need 
them.  Access  to  them  by  all  is  necessary  to  give  "Equal 
Opportunity  to  All."  No  individual  group  or  state  should 
be  permitted  to  withhold  them  from  the  people  of  the 
country,  or  to  limit  their  use  by  unjust  regulation,  ex- 
orbitant charges,  or  unequal  conditions. 

The  chief  asset  of  any  country  is  its  rising  generation, 
and  all  countries,  and  particularly  our  free  and  great 
United  States,  should  insist  as  a  paramount  issue  that 
"Equal  Opportunity"  be  vouchsafed  to  its  young  men. 
To  prove  that  such  opportunity  does  not  at  all  exist  to- 
da}r,  I  would  ask  you,  reader,  if  you  wished  to  place  your 
son  or  some  other  promising  young  man  in  a  profitable 
business  in  which  he  might  ultimately  rise  to  proprietor- 
ship, what  business  would  you  select  as  worth  the  effort 
of  thorough  preliminary  preparation?  You  know  per- 
fectly well  that  he  might  just  as  well  commit  financial 
suicide  as  to  undertake  to  engage  in  some  of  the  great  lines 
of  industry  in  our  country,  viz: 

[40] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

In  the  Oil  Business  in  competition  with  the 
existing  Oil  Trust. 

In  the  Coal  Business  in  competition  with  the 
Coal  Combine,  or  the  railroads  directly  or  indi- 
rectly carrying  coal  from  their  own  or  affiliated 
concerns'  coal  mines. 

In  the  meat  packing  business. 

Or  even  in  the  primary  steel  business. 

And  why?     Simply  because  he  would  not  have,  in  access      Lack  of 
to  national  resources  and  in  transportation,  "Equal  Op-      Equal  Op- 
portunity"  with  a  certain  privileged  class.     Please  note     for  ah 
the  significant  fact  that  all  of  those  industries  into  which 
he  cannot  enter  involve  bulky  articles  where  transporta- 
tion holds  the  key. 

You  are,  however,  well  assured  that  he  can  enter,  and 
on  equal  terms,  in  many  other  businesses,  some  of  them 
being  the  manufacture  of  almost  any  textile,  such  as  silks, 
cottons,  woolens,  worsteds,  or  in  any  other  manufacturing 
line  where  transportation  or  natural  resources  are  not 
important  factors.  Such,  for  example,  are  the  produc- 
tion of  drugs,  small  devices,  or  in  fact  of  any  device  or 
any  article  which  is  of  such  nature  as  to  entail  compara- 
tively small  transportation  charges.  Mark  you,  the  in- 
dustries you  or  your  son  cannot  enter  are  always  those 
where  railroad  freights  are  heavy,  and  where  access  to 
natural  resources  are  necessary. 

Therefore,  you  must  honestly  admit  that  the  reason 
of  this  lack  of  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  is  simply 
that,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  many  advantages  in 
rebates  or  otherwise  are  obtained  by  a  special  privileged 
class  for  shipments  over  transportation  lines,  as  against 
others  who  cannot  obtain  these  advantages. 

The  young  man  of  to-day  under  the  present  unequal 
conditions  and  opportunities  says:  "What's  the  vise? 
Special  privileges  have  all  the  fat  things  of  the  land.  I 
may  be  a  second  John  D.   Rockefeller  in  brains,  but  I 

[41] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Combina- 

tions  and 

Trust*. 


Youth. 
Transporta- 
tions and 
"Equal  Op- 
portunity." 


cannot  start  in  business  and  work  same  to  a  successful 
issue  in  certain  industries  such  as  oil,  coal,  meat  pack- 
ing, steel,  iron,  etc.,"  for  he  feels  and  knows  that  under 
the  present  advantageous  discrimination  given  to  a  special 
privileged  class,  and  denied  to  him,  he  would  be  attempt- 
ing the  impossible.  With  our  "Equal  Opportunity  for 
All"  plan  attained,  not  in  theory,  but  in  actual  fact,  our 
young  man  must  have  a  different  vision.  His  thoughts 
must  then  be:  "I  know  that  I  have  equity  in  one  set  of 
laws  over  the  entire  country  for  the  same  thing,  and  'Equal 
Opportunity'  with  all  others,  assured  me.  If  I  do  not 
succeed  it  is  because  of  something  lacking  in  myself." 
Hence  the  present  socialism  and  discontentedness  must 
give  way  to  sunny  optimism  and  to  high  purpose  unknown 
under  our  present  confused  and  chaotic  conditions. 

Right-minded  persons  do  not,  and  will  not,  decry  com- 
binations or  trusts  in  the  United  States,  provided  they 
are  accorded  here  only  such  advantages  as  all  others  can 
also  obtain  by  similar  intelligence,  application,  determina- 
tion, and  industry.  They  do  decry,  and  will  continue  to 
decry,  combinations  and  trusts  in  the  United  States  when 
coupled,  in  certain  of  our  industries,  with  control  of  na- 
tural resources  and  advantageous  discriminations  in  means 
of  transportation  to  the  benefit  of  a  certain  privileged 
class  and  to  the  detriment  of  all  others. 

The  absolute  cure  for  this,  the  greatest  of  our  curses, 
and  for  the  stifling  of  the  energies  of  our  youth  is  the 
maintaining  by  the  government  at  any  and  all  costs  con- 
ditions that  will  insure  absolutely  no  discrimination  under 
any  circumstances  by  any  interstate  means  of  transporta- 
tion or  by  any  monopoly  of  natural  resources.  With  one 
set  of  Federal  laws  for  all  interstate  means  of  transporta- 
tion and  all  natural  resources,  operating  both  within  the 
individual  state  and  without  the  state,  backed  by  the 
proper  government  supervision  and  control,  we  can  posi- 
tively accomplish  here  in  the  United  States  what  has  been 
accomplished  under  one  set  of  government  laws  in  Eng- 
land, France,  and  Germany. 


42 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Wc  do  not  need  government  ownership  of  our  coun- 
try's means  of  transportation  or  of  the  coal  and  iron 
mines  to  make  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All."  We  do  need, 
however,  and  must  have,  one  set  of  Federal  laws,  with 
stringent  government  control  and  supervision,  to  bring 
about  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All." 

Doomsday  will  arrive  before  we  get  it,  either  in  trans- 
portation or  in  business,  with  our  present  system  of  con 
fusion  and  chaos  caused  by  48  individual  states  making 
hundreds — yes,  thousands — of  different  state  laws  for 
the  same  thing,  a  considerable  proportion  of  which  arc 
contradictory,  and  many  impossible  of  proper  execution. 
In  this  connection  it  might  be  well  to  refer  to  the  recent 
attempt  of  the  State  of  Texas  to  compel  the  railroads  to 
discriminate  in  favor  of  Texas  against  the  citizens  of  the 
remaining  states  of  the  country,  also  to  such  absurdities 
as  have  occurred  where  one  railroad  which  winds  in  and 
out  between  Texas  and  Arkansas  has  to  put  screens  in 
all  the  car  windows  every  time  the  trains  cross  into 
Arkansas  and  to  take  them  out  every  time  they  cross  back 
into  Texas. 

History  records  that  when  the  laws  of  a  Country 
become  so  chaotic  as  to  be  unenforceable,  resulting  in 
benefits  to  a  privileged  few  and  not  in  equality  to  all,  the 
people  turn  to  Socialism  and  rebellion.  The  French  and 
the  American  revolutions  are  recent  examples  of  this. 

The  intention  of  the  creators  and  framers  of  our 
present  form  of  government  was  that  it  should  be  the  best 
in  the  world  and  that  equal  rights  should  be  vouchsafed 
to  all.  If  the  people  can  truly  rule,  securing  "Equality 
of  Opportunity"  it  will  actually  be  the  best  government  in 
the  world.  But  how  can  the  people  so  rule  under  our 
present  inequitable  system  of  forty-nine  different  juris- 
dictions, resulting  in  many  contradictory  laws  for  the 
same  thing — and  in  some  cases  laws  that  are  impossible 
of  execution — a  system  where  one  state  pretends  to  extend 
its  jurisdiction  over  forty-seven  other  states,  when  in  fact 

[  *3  I 


Government 
Ownership 
in  the 
United 
States  and 
Not  at  All 
Necessary. 


Chaotic 
and   Unen- 
forceable 
Laws 
Result  iii 
Socialism 
and 
Rebellion. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


The  People 

Must  Rule 

in   Fart  Not 

<;i   Theory. 


Our   Courts. 


Advance  of 
Socialism. 


Cure  for 
Socialism. 


it  is  utterly  impossible  for  such  state  to  extend  its  juris- 
diction beyond  its  own  borders,  either  legally  or  other- 
wise ? 

Our  people  must  rule,  not  in  theory  but  in  fact  and 
under  a  system  of  actual  "government  of  the  people,  by 
the  people,  and  for  the  people,'"'  but  if  our  laws  are  so 
chaotic  as  not  to  be  properly  enforceable,  how  can  the 
people  so  rule? 

Notwithstanding  how  you  philosophize  or  try  to  ex- 
plain,— under  our  present  confusion  of  laws  the  people 
know  things  are  inequitable  and  not  right,  and  that  al- 
though our  governmental  system  calls  for  "government 
of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people,"  the  people 
to-day  do  not  in  reality  properly  rule.  It  is  difficult,  of 
course,  and  in  fact  almost  impossible  for  them  to  properly 
locate  the  cause  which  produces  this  result  and  naturally 
they  blame  the  courts  and  there  is  a  demand  for  recall 
of  our  judges,  etc.  Now,  our  courts  are  all  right!  They 
have  no  alternative  but  to  interpret  the  laws  as  they  exist. 
What  is  wrong,  and  decidedly  wrong,  is  our  chaotic  con- 
dition of  forty-nine  different  systems  of  law  for  the  same 
thing,  and  no  equity  can  ever  exist  for  all  the  people  in 
the  United  States  until  same  is  changed. 

Observing  minds  must  be  struck  with  the  great  advance 
of  Socialism  during  the  past  few  years,  nor  is  this  advance 
confined  to  any  particular  section. 

The  people  may  be  told  that  they  rule,  but  gradually 
they  find  out  that  the}^  do  not, — and  hence  the  great 
advance  of  Socialism  and  unrest  in  our  midst. 

With  the  carrying  out  of  our  plans  of 
"Equal  Opportunity  for  All"  the  people  can 
and  will  actually  rule.  More  than  this  no  people 
can  do,  and  hence  there  can  be  no  cause  or 
justification  for  the  development  and  growth  of 
Socialism  amongst  us.  With  a  favorable  Con- 
gress and  President  our  present  system  can  be 

[44] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


easily  changed  (as  called  for  by  Laws  1  to  6 
herein)  and  equal  benefits  and  opportunity  in 
fact  accrue  to  all  our  people. 

Some  there  are  at  the  present  time  who  are  advocating 
the  taking  over  by  the  Federal  Government  of  all  the 
telegraph  and  telephone  companies  in  the  United  States. 
If  the  gentlemen  who  display  so  much  zeal  in  this  cause 
were  engaged  in  business,  as  the  writer  is,  both  in  America 
and  in  Europe,  they  would  know  and  thereby  would  be 
able  to  contrast  and  appreciate  the  wonderful  efficiency 
of  the  Bell  Telephone  System  here  as  against  the  great 
inefficiency  of  the  telephone  systems  in  the  large  cities 
of  Europe,  notably  Paris  and  Vienna,  and  even  London 
and  Berlin,  to  say  nothing  of  the  horrible  service 
of  the  country  districts  and  the  smaller  cities.  If  they 
had  had  experience  on  both  sides  of  the  water,  they  would 
be  well  satisfied  to  preserve  this  wonderful  example  of 
business  efficiency  in  the  service  of  the  public  known  as 
the  Bell  Company  as  a  corporation,  but  under  a  Federal 
Incorporation  Law,  providing  one  set  of  Federal  laws 
operating  both  within  and  without  the  state  where  domi- 
ciled to  cover  all  its  operations  throughout  the  country, 
and  consequently  under  simple  and  effective  Federal  su- 
pervision, instead  of  under  contradictory  and  confused 
state  and  Federal  supervision  by  forty-nine  different  juris- 
dictions. That  is  the  way  to  make  sure  that  the  best  pos- 
sible results  will  accrue  to  the  American  public. 

The  telephone  companies  and  the  telegraph  companies 
of  the  United  States,  and  the  great  Bell  Company  in  par- 
ticular, stand  in  just  the  same  interstate  relation  as  the 
great  transportation  lines  of  the  country.  The  Bell 
Company's  and  other  companies'  business  activities  con- 
sist in  selling  the  service  of  transportation  of  intelligence, 
either  by  the  human  voice  or  by  other  signs  transmitted 
over  the  wire  by  electric  current,  and  under  our  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All"  proposals,  such  activities  come  un- 
der Proposition  No.  2,  namely,  if  a  telephone  or  telegraph 
company  predetermines  and  predeclares  its  intention  to 

[45] 


The  Bell 
Telephone, 
Company, 
the  Tele- 
graph Com- 
panies, and 
the  United 
State* 
Public. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Result.* 

of  Suit:- 

Against 

Powerful 

Trusts  by 

the   United 

States. 


do  an  interstate  commerce  business  it  must  be  Federally 
incorporated  (and  if  it  does  not  so  incorporate  it  could 
not  collect  any  charge  for  interstate  service).  For  the 
Bell  Company  is  dealing  in  the  transportation  of  an  ar- 
ticle,— the  human  voice,  the  human  thought,  in  interstate 
transactions — exactly  as  the  other  transportation  lines  of 
the  country  are  dealing  in  the  transportation  of  people 
or  articles  of  freight.  When  the  Bell  Company  and 
all  telephone  and  telegraph  companies  are  federally 
incorporated,  the  Federal  Government  can,  to  all  ex- 
tent that  the  public  interest  requires  exercised  the  same 
supervision  and  control  over  the  telephone  and  telegraph 
business  as  it  will  under  our  proposals  over  railroad  and 
express  companies,  or  as  it  does  at  the  present  time  over 
the  National  banks.  It  can  see  to  it  that  the  toll  charges 
are  just,  equitable  and  fair  to  all  users.  With  such  super- 
vision and  control  there  is  absolutely  no  occasion  for  gov- 
ernment ownership  of  telephone  and  telegraph  companies. 
The  present  splendid  management  will  be  continued,  and 
the  rights  of  the  people  will  be  secured. 

The  Bell  Telephone  Company  is  now  a  national  tele- 
phone company  in  its  ownership  of  stock  and  in  the  great, 
nation-wide  service  rendered.  In  its  operations,  the  serv- 
ice to  the  public  far  exceeds  the  service  rendered  to  its 
individual  owners  or  to  any  individual  state,  and  with 
Federal  incorporation  thereof,  placing  all  its  business  ac- 
tivities, both  interstate  and  intrastate,  under  one  set  of 
Federal  laws,  and,  if  necessary,  with  government  super- 
vision and  control,  nothing  more  could  possibly  be  desired 
or  required  for  the  public  benefit  or  public  good. 

The  United  States,  after  spending  immense  sums,  won 
its  suits  against  some  of  the  most  powerful  trusts  in  the 
United  States,  but  with  what  result  for  the  benefit  of  the 
people?  Take,  for  instance,  the  result  of  the  suit  against 
the  "Oil  Trust."  After  winning  this  suit  the  government, 
owing  to  state  laws,  was  compelled  to  return  the  Oil  Trust 
to  its  individual  constituent  corporations  or  concerns — 
result :  some  twenty-two  or  more  separate  corporations, 
more    expensive    system    of    operation;    and    immediately 

[46] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


thereafter  the  price  of  oil,  gasoline,  etc.,  advanced  con- 
siderably. With  one  Federal  set  of  laws  in  operation  the 
trust's  duties  would  be  clearly  defined  and  failure  to 
comply  therewith  would  be  punishable  by  fine  and  by  the 
imprisonment  for  a  long  term  of  years  of  all  officers  or 
directors  thereof  who  were  cognizant,  or  who,  in  view  of 
their  respective  positions,  should  have  been  cognizant  of 
such  violation  of  the  law.  This  would  mark  at  once  the 
end  of  illegal  operations  of  all  trusts  and  combinations. 

There  have  been  many  things  charged  against  the 
Standard  Oil  Company  which  in  many  instances  were  not 
based  upon  the  actual  facts,  but  with  forty-nine  different 
systems  of  law  it  is  difficult  to  know  the  facts  either  for 
the  trusts  or  for  the  public ;  whereas  with  one  set  of  Fed- 
eral laws  in  all  states,  operating  the  same  all  over  the 
country,  there  would  then  be  no  more  violations  of  the 
laws  by  trusts  in  the  United  States  than  there  are  to-day 
— under  one  set  of  governmental  laws — by  trusts  in  Eng- 
land, France,  or  Germany. 

It  may  be  urged  by  some  reader:  What,  under  these 
plans  of  reorganization  of  our  governmental  system,  will 
be  left  of  the  "State's  Rights"  which  some  of  us  prize  so 
highly?  The  answer  to  such  an  objection  is  that  to  the 
states  will  be  left  all  control,  and  exclusive  control,  over 
the  land  within  the  state,  the  buildings  and  all  physical 
property  within  the  state,  and  over  all  business  activities 
which  are  confined  to  the  limits  of  the  state  boundaries. 
Why  should  any  state  control  more?  Or  why,  in  fact, 
should  any  state  desire  more?  The  object  of  the  state 
government  is  not  to  magnify  itself,  but  to  secure  the  wel- 
fare of  its  citizens.  It  is  to  the  interest  of  the  state,  as 
well  as  of  the  nation  and  of  the  individual,  that  the  powers 
of  government  should  be  well  distributed  and  efficiently 
exercised,  and  if  the  results  of  our  plans  are  for  the  benefit 
of  the  people  as  a  whole  they  will  be  happy  as  citizens  of 
states  as  well  as  citizens  of  the  nation.  The  people  rule 
in  this  country,  and  under  our  plans  they  will  rule  more 
effectively  than  before.  To  reduce  the  powers  of  a  state 
and  increase  those  of  the  nation  is  merely  a  choice  by  the 

[47] 


Under  our 
Proposal* 
There 
Would  be 
Little  or 
no   Viola- 
tions of 
our  Larox 
by  Trusts 
or  Com- 
binations. 


State 
Rights. 


Individual 
States    Will, 
Under  Otir 
Plan,  Have 
Practically 
the  Same 
Income,  But 
Materially 
Lessened 
Expendi- 
tures. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

citizen  of  what  instrumentality  he  will  select  to  carry  out 
his  purposes,  and  if  as  a  whole  those  purposes  are  more 
effectively  carried  out  by  the  proposed  change  every  one 
will  be  benefited  and  none  injured. 

But  it  will  be  said  that  the  revenues  of  the  state,  its 
taxing  power,  must  be  conserved  in  order  that  the  state 
may  properly  exert  its  legitimate  powers  of  local  govern- 
ment. Here  again  we  find  a  great  advantage  in  our  plan. 
Nothing  is  more  distressing  to  contemplate,  nothing  more 
chaotic,  than  our  tax  laws.  This  is  admitted  by  those 
most  directly  concerned  with  our  state  governments,  who 
dare  not  enforce  them  literally,  who  are  continually  com- 
plaining of  them  and  revising  them,  but  who  never  dare 
assert  that  they  are  satisfactory. 

There  are  certain  subjects  of  taxation  which  the  sym- 
metry of  our  plan  and  the  public  interest  require  to  be  na- 
tional. Such  are  the  taxation  of  credits,  which,  while 
collectable  at  some  point  within  a  state,  are  actually 
spread  over  the  whole  country,  and  the  taxation  of  other 
quick  assets  such  as  goods  traveling  or  about  to  travel  in 
interstate  commerce,  the  location  of  which  is  merely  ac- 
cidental. These  are  proper  subjects  for  national  taxation 
alone.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  are  not  reached  to  any 
extent  by  state  taxation  now,  but  the  conflicting  tax  laws 
of  the  several  states  do  hamper  business  and  burden  in- 
dustry. But  there  will  remain  to  the  states  practically 
everything  that  they  reach  by  their  taxation  now,  while 
at  the  same  time  the  demands  on  their  resources  will  be 
reduced. 

The  question  of  public  expenditures  and  public  reve- 
nues is  one  which  under  present  conditions,  and  particu- 
larly in  view  of  the  great  extension  of  governmental  func- 
tions, is  of  the  highest  interest  at  the  present  time.  How 
will  our  proposals  affect  this? 

First,  as  to  the  states  and  localities :  they  will  be  re- 
lieved of  enormously  expensive  commissions,  bureaus,  and 
investigations,  by  which  they  not  only  interfere  with  the 

[48] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


interstate  activities  of  their  citizens  and  industries,  but 
greatly  increase  the  burdens  of  their  taxpayers.  These 
state  and  local  commissions,  whether  temporary  or  per- 
manent; the  investigating  committees  appointed  by  state 
legislatures,  and  the  State  Attorney  Generals'  investiga- 
tions, all  of  which  cost  the  people  enormous  sums  of 
money,  are  concerned  almost  wholly  with  railroads  and 
other  interstate  means  of  transportation,  with  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  commodities,  with  the  regulation  of 
conditions  of  labor,  and  with  other  matters  which  are  in 
fact,  and  should  be  in  practice,  of  interstate  and  not  of 
local  concern.  Of  all  this  expense  the  individual  states 
will  be  relieved.  Such  expenses  (which  have  mainly  to  do 
with  articles  of  interstate  commerce)  have  been  duplicated 
and  duplicated  by  many  states  adjoining  one  another  and 
particularly  so  in  all  of  our  industrial  states  to  the  great 
financial  detriment  of  our  people. 

The  expenses  of  the  individual  States  have  in  the  past 
ten  years  increased  to  such  an  extent  that  they  are  assum- 
ing alarming  proportions.  You  will  kindly  note  that  these 
tremendous  increases  in  expenses  in  the  individual  states 
are  confined  almost  exclusively  to  the  industrial  States, 
which  are  now  trying  to  create  new  forms  of  taxes  in 
order  to  raise  revenue  sufficient  to  meet  their  outgo. 

As  these  expenses  have  so  materially  increased  only 
in  the  Industrial  States,  it  goes  without  saying  that  the 
great  proportion  of  these  increased  expenses,  amounting 
to  millions  of  dollars  annually,  is  due  as  stated  above  to 
the  excessive  commissions  of  one  kind  or  another  to  in- 
vestigate conditions  relative  to  hours  of  labor,  conditions 
of  labor,  minimum  wage,  etc.,  etc.  Such  investigation  has 
entirely  to  do  with  articles  predetermined  to  flow  in  Inter- 
state Commerce,  and,  therefore,  according  to  our  "Equal 
Opportunity  Plan,"  should  be  controlled  federally,  when 
there  would  be  but  one  expense  instead  of  twenty-five  to 
thirty  duplications  thereof. 

Some  of  these  Industrial  States  have  already  adopted 
a  State  Income  Tax  and  New  York  State  was  recently 

[49  1 


By  our 
Proposals 
Millions  of 
Dollars    Will 
be  Saved 
Annually 
by  the 
Individual 
States. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


An  Ounce  of 

Prevention 

Against  a 

Pound 

of  Cure. 


seriously  considering  and  advocating  a  State  Income  Tax 
on  all  incomes  over  $1,000  per  annum.  We,  therefore, 
believe  that  the  adoption  of  our  Equal  Opportunity  pro- 
position would  be  a  great  benefit  to  taxpayers  as  well  as 
producing  equal  opportunity  throughout  the  country. 

While  our  plan  would  thus  reduce  state  and  local  ex- 
penditures, and  hence  the  amount  to  be  raised  by  taxes, 
it  would  still  leave  to  the  states  for  taxation  all  the  prop- 
erty physically  within  the  state,  land,  buildings,  ma- 
chinery, and  fixed  assets  generally,  all  inheritances  pass- 
ing under  the  laws  of  the  state,  all  local  excises  and 
licenses,  all  industries  and  trade  limited  to  the  boundaries 
of  the  state.  In  brief,  the  state  would  retain  practically 
all  its  actual  revenues,  but  would  have  very  much  less 
occasion  for  expenditures. 

To  the  Federal  Government,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
open  the  opportunity  for  a  method  of  taxation  much  more 
scientific  than  is  now  possible.  Controlling  and  regulat- 
ing interstate  transactions,  and  extending  such  control 
and  regulation  to  the  source  within  the  individual  state, 
it  can  not  only  strengthen  its  control  by  the  ownership 
of  the  taxing  powers  strictly  relevant  thereto,  but  also, 
as  a  matter  of  revenue,  it  can  reach  all  these  activities 
by  taxation  and  can,  year  by  year,  adjust  the  amount  of 
taxation  to  the  current  requirements  of  the  government. 
At  present  Congress  has  no  idea  of  a  budget  or  of  a 
balance  sheet,  and  this  is  natural  where  revenues  are  from 
miscellaneous  and  uncertain  sources  and  spending  is  not 
co-ordinated.  The  placing  of  all  our  great  interstate 
businesses,  production,  transportation,  trade,  under  ex- 
clusive Federal  jurisdiction  will  enable  estimates  to  be 
made  and  revenue  to  be  secured  and  expended  with  a  pre- 
cision not  possible  under  our  present  unscientific  and 
confused  conditions. 

One  of  the  great  merits  which  we  claim  for  our  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All"  proposals  is  that  we  shall  by  this 
means  be   able   to   act   in   the   common   interest,   and   not 

f  50  1 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

merely  to  make  repairs  after  calamities  have  happened, 
but  to  prevent  calamities  altogether.  The  mark  of  ef- 
ficiency and  the  great  achievement  of  modern  civilization 
is  the  reaching  of  the  stage  where  things  are  done  right  in 
the  beginning  rather  than  simply  sought  to  be  made  right 
after  they  have  gone  wrong.  In  fact,  it  is  not  only  better 
but  easier  to  prevent  than  to  cure.  Thus,  in  medicine 
we  strive  to  prevent  illness,  and  especially  to  guard 
against  the  spread  of  a  pestilence  by  checking  the  con- 
tagion at  the  source.  Yellow  fever  used  to  scourge  Ha- 
vana year  by  year,  and  it  never  could  have  been  stopped 
by  waiting  for  people  to  come  down  with  the  fever  and 
then  administering  medicine.  The  medical  service  of  the 
United  States  Army  discovered  the  source  of  the  con- 
tagion, removed  the  cause,  and  no  more  medicine  or  nurs- 
ing is  necessary  because  there  are  no  more  cases.  A  great 
calamity  which  lately  came  upon  the  country  in  the  foot 
and  mouth  disease  among  cattle  was  due  to  lax  inspection 
by  one  or  two  individual  states,  whose  neglect  caused  a 
continent-wide  disaster.  Since  the  cattle  afflicted  with 
the  disease  were  raised  and  predestined  for  transport  into 
other  states,  they  should,  according  to  our  doctrine,  have 
been  under  Federal  law  and  control,  and  consequently 
should  have  been  taken  under  the  care  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, which  alone  can  act  quickly  and  uniformly  all 
over  the  continent,  and  then  this  terrible  menace  to  our 
food  supply,  to  our  pockets,  and  to  our  health  could  have 
been  checked  before  serious  harm  was  done. 

Again,  in  law,  the  highest  power  of  a  court  is  the 
proper  exercise  of  the  power  of  injunction,  which  prevents 
great  wrongs  from  being  done,  wrongs  for  which  often  no 
adequate  damages  can  be  given  once  they  have  happened. 
Or  again  the  law  forbids  the  carrying  of  weapons  with 
which  crimes  may  be  committed,  or  the  sale  of  liquor  un- 
der circumstances  where  its  consumption  might  lead  to 
crime.  This  is  better  for  the  public  and  for  the  possible 
criminal  himself  than  simply  locking  him  up  in  a  jail  or 
taking  his  life  after  he  has  slain  another. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Control  of 
Predeter- 
mined 
Interstate 
Articles 
Should 
Begin  at  the 
Beginning 
Within  the 
Individual 
State. 


Method  of 
Putting 
'Equal  Op- 
portunity 
for  All" 
Proposals 
into 
Operation. 


Illustrations  might  be  multiplied,  but  are  hardly  neces- 
sary. If  an  act  done  within  a  state  is  predetermined  by 
its  very  object  and  characteristics  to  operate  upon  the 
people  of  other  states  and  to  affect  their  interests,  the 
time  to  prevent,  control,  or  regulate  the  act  is  before  or 
while  it  is  being  done,  not  after  the  operation  upon  the 
interests  of  the  citizens  of  the  other  states  has  been  ac- 
tually begun.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  articles  prede- 
termined and  predeclared  for  interstate  commerce  should 
come  under  Federal  control  before,  not  after,  they  cross  • 
the  state  line,  and  that  such  control  should  begin  at  the 
beginning,  not  when  part  of  the  work  is  done  and  cannot 
conveniently  be  undone. 

The  adulteration  of  food,  for  example,  is  prevented 
and  the  conditions  of  cleanliness  and  labor  under  which  it 
is  manufactured,  should  be,  and  under  the  present  pure 
food  law  are,  taken  care  of  at  the  factory,  not  after  the 
package  crosses  the  state  line.  We  ask  that  the  same 
effective  remedy  be  extended,  and  we  claim,  therefore,  for 
our  plans  of  "Equal  Opportunity  for  All,"  not  only  jus- 
tice, but  also  economy  and  efficiency  in  the  highest  degree. 

Furthermore  in  1787  the  original  States  placed  under 
Federal  control  and  law  those  things  which  had  then  be- 
come more  of  general  than  of  individual  state  interest. 
Whereas  those  things  were  few  in  1787,  now  with  our 
wonderful  later  development  they  have  become  many, 
and  we  ask  only,  by  our  proposals,  that  the  same  prin- 
ciple be  applied  to  those  many  things  that  have  now  be- 
come more  of  general  or  interstate  interest  and  less  of 
any  one  state  interest,  as  was  applied  in  1787  to  the  few 
things  of  that  day ;  and  that  the  law  relative  to  these 
many  things  of  to-day  be  made  Federal  just  the  same  as 
the  few  things  of  1787  were  then  made  Federal. 

Our  proposals,  therefore,  as  you  will  see,  are  not  revo- 
lutionary, but  natural. 

The  practical  method  of  putting  into  operation  the 
ideas  here  suggested  would  be  an  extremely  simple  one. 

[52  1 


E  Q  U   A   L       O  P   P  O  R  T  U   N   I   T  Y       FOR       ALL 


Each  person,  firm,  or  corporation  in  or  about  to  en- 
gage in  business  and  desiring  their  business  activity  to 
extend  beyond  the  borders  of  the  state  wherein  they  are 
domiciled,  must  file  a  certificate  with  a  proper  depart- 
ment of  the  Federal  Government,  signifying  their  inten- 
tion to  do  an  interstate  commerce  business ;  that  is  to 
say,  that  the  articles  produced  or  sold,  purchased  or 
handled  by  the  proprietors  of  the  business  are  to  be 
shipped  or  consigned  by  such  proprietors  beyond  the 
state  line  or  received  by  them  from  outside  of  the  state. 
In  which  case,  if  a  corporation,  it  must  be  incorporated 
under  a  Federal  Incorporation  Act,  and  if  an  individual 
or  firm  they  must  take  out  a  Federal  license,  the  effect  of 
which  license  would  be  to  put  them  under  the  same  set  of 
laws  and  conditions  as  a  corporation  operating  under  a 
Federal  Incorporation  Act;  and  it  should  be  unlawful  for 
any  individual,  firm,  or  corporation  not  filing  such  cer- 
tificate to  do  an  interstate  commerce  business. 

All  such  concerns  as  predetermine  and  predeclare  their 
intention  to  embark  upon  the  handling,  manufacture,  or 
sale  of  articles  which  will  be  shipped  directly  into  or  be 
received  directly  from  other  states — or,  in  other  words, 
in  interstate  commerce — shall  come  exclusively  under  Fed- 
eral law  as  far  as  their  business  activities  are  concerned, 
which  law  shall  regulate  all  matters  relative  to  the  business 
both  within  the  state  where  located  or  domiciled  and  with- 
out the  state,  and  shall  include  sanitary  factory  regula- 
tions and  all  regulations  relative  to  labor  connected  with 
said  articles  so  predetermined  and  so  predeclared  to  flow 
in  interstate  commerce. 

Likewise  the  receiver  in  New  York  or  other  large  cities 
of  cotton,  grain,  farm  produce,  and  the  commission  mer- 
chants handling  such  articles  from  farmers  all  over  the 
country  will  be  subject  to  uniform  Federal  regulation, 
whereby  those  that  ship  or  consign  such  articles  will  be 
impartially  protected. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  any  individual,  firm,  or  cor- 
poration  desires   to   confine   their  business   activities   en- 

[53] 


Interstate 
B  usiness. 


Protection 
for  the 
farmer  in 
our  "Equa! 
Oppor- 
tunity'' 
Plan. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Exclusive 
Business 

Within  the 
Limits 
of  the 

Individual 
State. 


'Equal  Op- 
portunity" 
System 
Easy  of 
Enforce- 
men  I . 


tirely  within  the  borders  of  the  state  where  located,  then 
they  need  file  no  certificate  of  interstate  business  inten- 
tions, and  all  such  concerns  will  be  debarred  from  doing 
an  interstate  commerce  business.  In  case  of  a  corpora- 
tion not  filing  a  certificate  of  interstate  business  inten- 
tions, said  corporation,  however,  must  be  incorporated  in 
the  state  wherein  the  business  is  located,  so  as  to  avoid 
the  anomaly  of  a  business  enterprise  established  in  one 
state  being  governed,  in  its  most  vital  affairs,  by  the  laws 
of  another  state,  which  is,  in  fact,  in  no  way  interested 
therein. 

It  may  be  asked :  How  can  such  a  system  be  enforced  ? 
Will  it  not  result  that  the  proprietor  of  a  business  not 
filing  a  certificate  of  interstate  intentions  may  nevertheless 
proceed  to  sell  goods  beyond  the  state  line,  and  if  this 
happens  how  can  a  penalty  be  visited  upon  such  pro- 
prietor? Would  it  be  practical  to  provide  a  criminal 
penalty  for  such  an  offense,  and  how  could  any  govern- 
mental agency  watch  for  and  punish  such  violation  of 
the  proposed  system,  which  in  many  cases  would  be  com- 
paratively trifling  in  importance? 

The  answer  to  these  questions  is  a  ready  one.  It  is 
necessary  only  to  provide  that  in  case  any  owner  of  a 
business  carries  on  busines  across  the  line  of  the  state 
without  having  filed  a  certificate  of  interstate  intentions, 
the  contract  of  sale  thus  made  shall  be  invalid,  with  the 
resulting  consequence  that  no  recovery  can  be  had  in 
any  court  for  the  goods  or  for  the  purchase  money  pay- 
able under  the  terms  of  such  sales.  In  other  words,  the 
purchaser  can  refuse  to  pay,  merely  because  his  vendor 
has  violated  the  law  in  making  the  sale  in  question.  This 
penalty  to  the  vendor  would  prove  an  effective  deterrent 
to  such  practice.  It  is  not  a  criminal  penalty,  but  one 
automatically  enforceable  by  private  persons  without  the 
agency  of  a  court  or  governmental  forces  at  all,  and  has 
proved  strikingly  effective  as  a  means  of  enforcing  laws 
of  a  nature  similar  to  the  system  here  proposed.  In  short, 
all  that  is  needed  are  laws  of  Congress,  providing: 

[54  1 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


First — That  every  person,  firm,  or  corpora- 
tion predetermining  to  have  their  business  ac- 
tivities extend  beyond  the  state  wherein  they  are 
located  must  file  a  certificate  with  a  department 
of  the  government,  to  the  effect  that  they  intend 
to  engage  in  an  interstate  commerce  business, 
and  as  such  shall  be  subject  exclusively  to  Fed- 
eral Interstate  Commerce  Acts,  which  Acts  shall 
be  extended,  of  course,  to  cover  wise  and  salu- 
tary provisions  for  the  operatives. 

Second — That  all  business  enterprises  en- 
gaging in  interstate  business  under  corporate 
form  shall  be  incorporated  under  Federal  law. 
That  all  persons  or  individuals  engaging  in  in- 
terstate commerce  business  can  do  so  only  under 
a  Federal  license  so  as  to  make  them  come  under 
the  same  Federal  law  as  Federally  incorporated 
concerns,  which  law  shall  be  enacted  by  Congress 
for  the  purpose. 

The  framers  of  the  Constitution  were  called  together 
by  Washington  to  take  counsel  upon  questions  of  com- 
merce, not  of  politics.  From  that  commercial  meeting 
arose  our  great  nation.  In  the  Constitution  which  they 
drew  they  decreed  that  all  commerce  that  went  beyond 
the  boundaries  of  a  state,  and  all  instruments  of  such 
commerce,  ships,  mails,  and  money  among  them,  should 
be  under  the  Federal  jurisdiction. 

As  the  nation  has  grown  the  wisdom  of  these  provisions 
has  been  shown  more  and  more,  and  Congress,  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Supreme  Court,  has  exercised  with  in- 
creasing courage  the  powers  thus  conferred.  In  1824?  the 
nation  took  control  of  the  navigable  waters,  in  1853  of 
the  building  of  railroads,  in  1863  of  the  banks,  in  1887 
of  the  operation,  charges,  and  contracts  of  transporta- 
tion lines,  in  1906  of  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  foods 
and  drugs,  and  in  1909  it  assumed  the  right  to  tax  every 
corporation   in   the   country   for   the   privilege   of   doing 

r  55  1 


Enlarge- 
ment of  the 
Constitution 
by  Congress 
and  the 
Supreme 
Court  of 
the   United 
States. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


A    Wonder- 
ful Govern- 
ment  of 
Equity, 
Simplicity, 
and  Justice. 


Recapitu- 
lation. 


business,  and  thereby  necessarily  the  right  to  say  that 
they  should  not  do  business  without  Federal  permission. 

In  the  Federal  Pure  Food  Bill  (so-called)  Congress 
controls  within  the  state  all  articles  of  food  intended  to 
flow  in  interstate  commerce ;  right  in  the  same  factory, 
however,  it  does  not  control  even  the  same  articles  when 
intended  for  exclusive  state  use,  proving  conclusively  that 
the  Supreme  Court  considers  the  words  in  the  Constitu- 
tion— "that  Congress  shall  have  power  to  regulate  inter- 
state commerce" — to  mean  all  articles  of  business  ac- 
tivities  -flowing   between  states. 

Thus  have  Congress  and  the  Supreme  Court  met  each 
requirement  of  advancing  national  greatness,  and  now 
we  ask  that  a  further  step  be  taken  to  meet  the  greater 
demands  of  this  greater  day. 

What  a  wonderful  system  of  government  would  be  ours 
if  the  propositions  here  outlined  were  put  into  operation — 
a  system  that  would  be  simple,  just,  and  equitable  to  all. 
What  a  mass  of  evils  from  which  we  now  suffer  would  be 
eradicated !  We  are  at  present  face  to  face  with  grave 
and  vital  dangers.  Are  we  to  follow,  after  all  our  glorious 
history,  in  the  path  of  the  great  Roman  Empire  of  old? 

Rome  in  her  day  was  far  more  powerful  proportion- 
ately than  the  United  States  is  now.  Equal  opportunity 
was  denied,  and  was  indeed  impossible  of  attainment,  to 
the  people  under  the  Roman  domain.  There  were  then 
certain  favored  privileged  classes,  others  could  not  obtain 
their  opportunities  and  benefits,  and  therefore  Rome  in 
time  crumbled  and  decayed.  Equal  Opportunity  does  not 
exist  to-day  in  the  United  States,  and  can  never  exist 
here  under  the  present  absurd,  unscientific,  and  destruc- 
tive state  laws,  resulting  in  hundreds  of  different  laws  for 
the  same  conditions,  inevitably  bringing  about  the  present 
confusion  and  chaos. 

Equal  opportunity  for  everyone  in  the  United  States 
can  be  brought  about  by  the  adoption  of  a  system  pro- 

[56] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


viding  for  Federal  control — same  operating  both  within 
the  individual  states  and  in  interstate  relations — over  con- 
cerns that  intend  and  declare  their  intention  to  engage 
to  any  extent  whatever  in  an  interstate  commerce  busi- 
ness, and  for  state  control  over  concerns  confining  their 
business  activities  wholly  within  the  borders  of  a  par- 
ticular state;  providing  for  a  national  incorporation  law 
for  corporations  and  a  national  license  law  for  individuals 
and  firms  engaged  or  intending  to  engage  in  any  interstate 
commerce  business ;  for  incorporation  by  each  state  of 
corporations  only  that  transact  their  business  within  such 
state;  and  for  Federal  regulation  of  the  ownership  and 
development  of  natural  resources,  such  as  coal  and  water 
power,  and  of  contracts  of  insurance,  and  of  the  sale  or 
purchase  of  interstate  securities  at  public  exchanges. 

The  question  is  a  large  one — an  immense  one.  The 
great  government  of  the  United  States  cannot  perman- 
ently exist  except  by  giving  in  fact,  not  in  theory  or  form, 
but  in  actual  fact,  equal  opportunity  to  each  and  every 
one  of  our  people. 

The  question,  therefore,  is:  Shall  the  nation,  by  ad- 
vancing with  changing  conditions,  give  to  her  people  and 
to  humanity  greater  and  greater  benefits,  or  shall  she 
deny  such  benefits  to  her  citizens  and  leave  them,  as  now, 
struggling  under  hundreds  of  laws  conflicting  and  con- 
tradictory, and  with  advantages  in  so  many  walks  of  life 
enjoyed  and  obtainable  only  by  a  special  privileged  class? 
If  the  latter  course  be  followed,  this  great  government  of 
the  United  States  cannot  endure.  For  the  assurance  of 
"Equal  Opportunity"  to  all  the  people  is  the  only  founda- 
tion of  permanency  for  any  government. 

Succinctly  stated,  the  following  are  the  propositions 
and  laws  which  are  necessary  and  required  to  bring  about 
the  "Equal  Opportunity"  results  desired: 

Law  1.  That  Congress  shall  pass  a  law  re- 
quiring each  person,  firm,  or  corporation  de- 
siring their  business  activities  to  extend  beyond 

[57] 


Paramovnt 
Tssue. 


Laws 

Required  of 
Congress  to 
Put  our 
"Equal  Op- 
portunity'' 
Proposals 
Into 
Operation. 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 

the  borders  of  the  state  wherein  they  are  "domi- 
ciled" to  file  a  certificate  with  a  proper  depart- 
ment of  the  Federal  Government,  signifying 
their  intention  to  do  an  interstate  commerce 
business ;  that  is  to  say,  that  the  "articles"  pro- 
duced or  sold,  purchased  or  handled,  by  the 
proprietors  of  the  business  are  to  be  shipped 
or  consigned  by  such  proprietors  beyond  the 
state  line  or  received  by  them  from  outside  of 
the  state. 

Law  2.  The  law  shall  provide  that  any 
such  person,  firm,  or  corporation  filing  such  cer- 
tificate of  intention  to  do  such  interstate  com- 
merce business  shall,  if  a  corporation,  be  Fed- 
erally incorporated,  and  if  an  individual  or 
firm  be  Federally  licensed,  the  effect  of  said 
license  being  to  put  them  under  the  same  set  of 
laws  and  conditions  as  a  corporation  operating 
under  a  Federal  Incorporation  Act ;  and  it  shall 
be  unlawful  for  any  individual,  firm,  or  corpora- 
tion not  filing  such  certificate  to  do  an  interstate 
commerce  business. 

Law  3.  The  law  shall  provide  that  all  such 
concerns  that  so  predetermine  and  so  predeclare 
their  intention  to  embark  upon  the  handling, 
manufacture,  or  sale  of  articles  which  will  be 
shipped  directly  into  or  be  received  directly  from 
other  states — or,  in  other  words,  in  interstate 
commerce — shall  come  exclusively  under  Federal 
law  so  far  as  their  business  activities  are  con- 
cerned, which  law  shall  regulate  all  matters 
relative  to  the  business  both  within  the  state 
where  located  or  domiciled  and  without  the  state. 
Said  laws  shall  include  sanitary  factory  regu- 
lations and  all  regulations  relative  to  labor  con- 
nected with  said  articles  so  predetermined  and  so 
predeclared  to  flow  or  travel  in  interstate  com- 
merce. 

[58] 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Law  If,.  The  law  shall  provide  that  any  in- 
dividual, firm,  or  corporation  not  filing  a  cer- 
tificate of  such  interstate  business  intention  will 
be  debarred  from  doing  an  interstate  commerce 
business,  and  shall  confine  their  business  activi- 
ties within  the  border-line  of  the  states  wherein 
domiciled.  No  such  state  corporation  shall, 
however,  be  incorporated  in  any  state  except  in 
the  state  wherein  domiciled. 

Law  5.  The  law  shall  provide  that  in  case 
any  owner  of  a  business  not  having  filed  a  cer- 
tificate of  such  interstate  intention,  nevertheless 
carries  on  business  across  the  line  of  the  state, 
the  contract  of  sale  thus  made  shall  be  an  invalid 
one — that  is,  unenforceable — with  the  resulting 
consequence  that  no  recovery  thereon  can  be  had 
in  any  court. 

Law  6.  The  law  shall  provide  that  Con- 
gress shall  regulate  the  ownership  and  develop- 
ment of  mineral  resources  and  water  powers, 
contracts  of  insurance,  and  the  sale  of  securi- 
ties at  public  exchanges. 

While,  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  our  best  legal  minds, 
most,  if  not  all,  of  these  measures  are  within  the  scope  of 
the  present  Constitutional  powers  of  Congress,  yet  in  the 
interest  of  precision  and  to  avoid  disputes,  doubts,  and 
delays,  it  seems  best  that  Congress  should  propose,  and  constitu- 
te states  should  pass  upon,  an  amendment  to  the  Con-  tional 
stitution  providing  that  Amendment. 

"Congress  shall  have  power  to  regulate  and 
control  all  establishments  engaging  in  foreign 
or  interstate  commerce  or  producing  articles 
sold  or  transported  in  foreign  or  interstate 
commerce ;  said  regulation  and  control  shall  ex- 
tend, however,  only  to  the  sanitary  condition  of 
such  establishments  and  the  hours,  kind,  condi- 

[59] 


E  Q   I'   A   L       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       A   I,  L 

tions,  and  wages  of  labor  employed  therein  and 
the  issue  of  securities  thereby ;  Congress  also 
shall  have  power  to  regulate  the  ownership  and 
development  of  mineral  resources  and  water 
powers,  contracts  of  insurance,  and  the  sale  of 
securities  at  public  exchanges ;  Congress  shall 
also  have  power  to  regulate,  control,  acquire, 
construct,  use,  and  operate  all  means  and  lines 
of  transportation  carrying  any  commodity 
which  is  sold  or  transported  in  interstate  or 
foreign  commerce,  carrying  any  interstate  or 
foreign  passengers,  or  transmitting  power  or 
intelligence  across  state  lines;  Congress  shall 
also  have  power  to  grant  licenses  and  corporate 
charters  in  all  cases  except  where  the  business 
of  such  licensee  or  corporation  is  to  be  trans- 
acted wholly  within  the  limits  of  a  single  state; 
and  no  state  shall  have  power  to  grant  to  any 
person  or  corporation  the  right  to  do  business 
of  any  kind  beyond  the  limits  of  such  state." 

With  the  enactment  of  the  above  laws,  fortified  by 
and  resting  upon  the  suggested  Constitutional  amend- 
ment, we  would  have  in  our  midst  "Equal  Opportunity 
for  All,"  not  in  theory,  but  in  actual  fact.  Let  all  who 
so  believe  work  for  the  accomplishment  of  these  greatly- 
to-be-desired  results. 


(;o 


EQUAL       OPPORTUNITY       FOR       ALL 


Author's  Note: — The  Author  would  be  glad,  on  re- 
quest, to  furnish,  free,  copies  of  this  booklet.  Address 
Frederic  E.  Kip,  "Kypsburg,"  Montclair,  New  Jersey. 
To  the  reader  who  believes  (and  we  cannot  conceive  how 
anyone  reading  this  article  carefully  can  do  otherwise) 
that  it  is  impossible  to  obtain  in  the  United  States  "Equal 
Opportunity  for  All"  except  by  one  set  of  Federal  laws 
for  all  business  activities  and  labor  connected  therewith, 
predetermined  to  flow  or  go  in  interstate  commerce,  we 
would  respectfully  state  that  it  is  not  by  hearing,  seeing, 
or  believing  that  results  are  accomplished,  but  by  action; 
and,  furthermore,  if  that  reader  and  believer  would  lend 
his  co-operation,  these  highly  desirable  results,  for  the 
benefit  of  all  humanity,  would  soon  be  an  accomplished 
fact  in  our  midst. 

There  are  many  ways  in  which  you  can  add  your 
influence  to  accomplish  the  results  desired. 

First — You  can  be  a  live  missionary  and  talk  to  and 
convince  as  many  of  your  friends  as  possible. 

Second — At  election  time,  and  as  much  before  elec- 
tion as  possible,  and  at  the  primaries,  you  can  urge  and 
demand  that  before  being  endorsed  or  nominated  for 
election  all  State  Governors,  State  Assemblymen,  and 
State  Senators,  and  all  United  States  Senators  and  United 
States  Congressmen  promise  to  approve,  further,  and 
vote  for  the  carrying  out  of  these  simple  plans  for  the 
reorganization  of  our  governmental  system,  as  set  forth 
in  the  six  propositions  marked  Laws  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and  6, 
and  in  the  suggested  Constitutional  amendment  on  pages 
67,  58,  and  59,  which  show  the  simple  provisions  designed 
to  bring  about  and  to  vouchsafe  "Equal  Opportunity  for 
All"  and  special  privileges  to  none. 


[61 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

HI 


AA    001  008  752    6 


SOUTHERN  BRANCH, 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA, 

LIBRARY, 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIF. 


^M8" 


